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>Writ petition allowed; Demand-cum-Show-Cause Notice set aside; matter remanded for fresh proceedings under GST law.</h1> HC allowed the writ petition following a concession by the Departmental Senior Standing Counsel, set aside the Demand-cum-Show-Cause Notice issued by the ... Eligibility of Input tax credit - initiation of proceedings u/s 73 of the GST Act without issuance of a proper show cause notice - HELD THAT:- In view of the statement made by the learned Departmental Senior Standing Counsel, this writ petition stands allowed in view of the concession made. The Demand -cum- Show Cause Notice passed by the Additional Commissioner under the office of the Commissioner, Central Goods and Services Tax, Dimapur, which are impugned in this writ petition are set aside. However, the matter is remanded back to the Additional Commissioner under the office of the Commissioner, Central Goods and Services Tax, Dimapur to draw-up an appropriate proceeding against the petitioner, if so advised, in accordance with law. Petition allowed by way of remand. Petitioner challenged Demand-cum-Show Cause Notice (SCN No. 10/GST/DIMAPUR/2022-23 dated 16.09.2022) and Order-in-Original No.14/Addl. Commr./GST/Dimapur/2023-24 dated 24.11.2023 assessing alleged excess Input Tax Credit of Rs. 52,88,894/- and issued under Section 73 proceedings. Relying on the court's earlier holding that 'proceedings under Section 73 of the GST Act cannot be validly initiated without issuance of a proper show cause notice,' counsel for respondents conceded by written instruction that no prior show cause notice had been issued. In view of that concession, the impugned Demand-cum-SCN and Order-in-Original were set aside. The matter is remanded to the Additional Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner, Central GST, Dimapur to 'draw-up an appropriate proceeding against the petitioner, if so advised, in accordance with law.' The departmental instruction produced in court was returned.