Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Don't have an account? Register Here
<h1>Petition challenging CGST interest demand dismissed; advised to contest rectification order under Section 161 through legal avenues.</h1> The HC addressed a petition challenging an interest demand order under the CGST Act. The petitioner contended that Section 128A permits waiving interest ... Waiver of interest or penalty or both relating to a demand under Section 73 of CGST Act - main grievance of the petitioner is that since the appeal was affected by the limitation, it was automatically rejected by the authority without considering the bona fide reasons for the delay - HELD THAT:- Taking into consideration the fact that subsequent to the impugned order dated 30.12.2023, the authorities have passed a rectification order under Section 161 of the TNGST Act, on 28.02.2025, the petitioner is directed to challenge the rectification order, if aggrieved by it, by following the due process of law. Petition disposed off. In the case before the Madras High Court, the petitioner challenged an interest demand order dated 30.12.2023, issued by the fourth respondent, under the CGST Act. The petitioner argued that Section 128A of the CGST Act allows for the waiver of interest or penalties for the period from July 2017 to March 2018, which was not considered by the respondents. The petitioner's appeal was rejected due to limitation issues without considering bona fide reasons for delay.The Government Advocate for the respondents indicated that a rectification order dated 28.02.2025 was subsequently issued under Section 161 of the CGST Act, concerning the levy of interest under Section 50(1). The Court, presided by Honourable Mr. Justice Vivek Kumar Singh, acknowledged this and directed the petitioner to challenge the rectification order through the appropriate legal channels if aggrieved. The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs, and any connected miscellaneous petition was closed.