Profiteering in construction services for failure to pass input tax credit resulted in repayment exceeding the commensurate benefit and closure of pro...
The HC held that a writ challenge to a GST DRC-01A intimation under Section 74(5) read with Rule 142(1A) was premature because the communication was only a pre-adjudication step. As no adjudication had yet occurred, and the proposed demand required factual examination including the special audit report, the dispute was not fit for writ interference. The department was directed to issue a show cause notice, grant a hearing, and pass a reasoned order. The petitioner may then pursue the statutory appellate remedy under Section 107 against the adjudicatory order, with all contentions left open.
The HC held that a writ challenge to a GST DRC-01A intimation under Section 74(5) read with Rule 142(1A) was premature because the communication was only a pre-adjudication step. As no adjudication had yet occurred, and the proposed demand required factual examination including the special audit report, the dispute was not fit for writ interference. The department was directed to issue a show cause notice, grant a hearing, and pass a reasoned order. The petitioner may then pursue the statutory appellate remedy under Section 107 against the adjudicatory order, with all contentions left open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
