TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>GST Input Tax Credit Recovery Halted: Computational Errors Require Fresh Examination and Fair Hearing for Taxpayer</h1> <h3>Sri Ganpati Exports Pvt. Ltd. Versus Commissioner, CGST, Delhi West.</h3> Delhi HC in W.P.(C) 6664/2025 addressed GST ITC recovery orders with computational errors. Court directed DGGI to re-examine orders, provide personal ... Duplication of the demand - Issuance of two Show Cause Notices - recovery of Input Tax Credit - erroneous total demand figure - HELD THAT:- Both the Orders-in-Original shall be re-considered only qua the Petitioner by the Adjudicating Authority for correction of these errors. Before correcting the same, a personal hearing shall be afforded and the notice shall be sent at the following email address and mobile no. After hearing the Petitioner, within thirty days, the corrected order shall be communicated to the Petitioner. Upon the corrected order being communicated, the Petitioner shall be free to avail of his remedies in accordance with law. The petition is disposed of in these terms. The Delhi High Court, in W.P.(C) 6664/2025, addressed a petition filed by Sri Ganpati Exports Pvt. Ltd. under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging two Orders-in-Original dated 01st and 04th February 2025 issued pursuant to Show Cause Notices by the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) demanding recovery of Input Tax Credit (ITC).The Petitioner contended three primary issues: (1) duplication of the demand amount Rs. 20,20,414/- appearing in both Show Cause Notices; (2) an erroneous total demand figure stated as Rs. 2,83,56,714/- instead of Rs. 67,71,420/-; and (3) a misstatement of Rs. 33,85,710/- as Rs. 35,85,710/-. The Respondent did not dispute these errors.The Court held that the Orders-in-Original shall be re-considered solely in respect of the Petitioner by the Adjudicating Authority to correct these errors. Prior to correction, a personal hearing must be afforded, with notice sent to the Petitioner's counsel via specified email and mobile number. The corrected order is to be communicated within thirty days, after which the Petitioner may pursue remedies 'in accordance with law.'The petition was disposed of accordingly, with pending applications also dismissed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
