Petition Dismissed: Jurisdictional and Factual Matters to be Reviewed by Appellate Authority under CGST Act Section 107.

The HC dismissed the petition challenging the Order-in-Original dated 21.02.2024, which addressed issues of incorrect input tax credit and IGST refund claims. The petitioner argued that the notice should have been issued under Section 73, not Section 74, of the CGST Act, and contested the validity of a notification extending the limitation period. The HC determined that jurisdictional and factual matters should be addressed by the appellate authority under Section 107 of the CGST Act. The petitioner was granted the liberty to appeal to the appellate authority for a comprehensive examination of the issues.

---

---

Issues:
1. Jurisdiction of the impugned order under Section 74 of the CGST Act instead of Section 73
2. Validity of the notification extending the limitation of issuing the notice under Section 73 of the CGST Act
3. Challenge to the Order-in-Original dated 21.02.2024

Analysis:

1. The petitioner sought to quash the Order-in-Original dated 21.02.2024 concerning the issues of "wrong availment/passing on of input tax credit" and "wrong availment of IGST refund under Advance Authorisation scheme." The petitioner also challenged Notification No. 09/2023-Central Tax as ultra vires. The petitioner argued that the notice should have been issued under Section 73 of the CGST Act, not Section 74, rendering the impugned order jurisdictionally flawed.

2. The petitioner contended that the extension of the limitation for issuing notices under Section 73 of the CGST Act, as per the notification dated 31.03.2023, was invalid. The petitioner highlighted that similar issues were pending in other cases before the Court, with interim orders already in place. The petitioner requested the present case to be heard alongside those cases to ensure consistency in decisions.

3. The Court noted that the impugned order was essentially a challenge to the Order dated 21.02.2024. The Court emphasized that the appellate authority, under Section 107 of the CGST Act, was the appropriate forum to address questions of jurisdiction, facts, and law. The Court declined to entertain the petition regarding the orders under challenge, stating that the Appellate Authority would comprehensively examine all relevant aspects, including questions of law and fact. The Court dismissed the petition, granting the petitioner the liberty to appeal before the appellate authority if desired.

---