TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (11) TMI 713
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....020, issued by the 1st Respondent as illegal, improper and incorrect". 2) The averments made in the affidavit, filed in support of the Writ Petition show that, the Petitioner is duly registered under the Companies Act and doing business of manufacturing and sale of alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages, ethanol etc. The Petitioner Company is registered with GST Department and is assigned to the Central jurisdiction, for the purpose of assessment. 3) It is said that, GST liability could not be cleared, by the Petitioner, in time, due to certain unforeseen circumstances in the Unit, but, however, subsequently, the same was cleared. 4) While things stood thus, a notice, dated 15.01.2019, came to be issued by the 2nd Respondent, under Sectio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ss since none of the outward supplies of the Petitioner fall within the ambit of cess and the amount of Rs. 8,78,836/- was inadvertently mentioned in Cess column of the returns instead of IGST Column. A Writ Petition came to be filed before the court challenging the penalty. 8) For the period January 2019 to December 2019, the 2nd Respondent issued another Notice, dated 28.07.2020, in Form GSTR ASMT-10 under Section 61(1) of CGST Act, showing the discrepancy of tax between GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B of Rs. 1,76,02,936/-. The same was explained by the Petitioner, vide letter, dated 26.08.2020, and requested three months time to discharge the liability wherever applicable. 9) Insofar as the period January 2020 to June 2020 is concerned, another not....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Petitioner has filed GSTR-1 for certain months, but failed to file GSTR-3B returns for the corresponding months. 13) In view of the above, it is urged that, no revenue is actually transferred to the Government, and on the other hand, the customers to whom the Petitioner has issued invoices would avail GST Credit, which the Petitioner has not paid. He further pleads that, failure on the part of the Petitioner to submit GSTR 3B returns within the prescribed time lead the authorities to recover the GST liability, which is inclusive of penalty. 14) The point that arises for consideration is, whether the Garnishee Notice issued by the 1st Respondent is in tune with the principles of natural justice? 15) For the tax period January 2020 to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... period is over, the Garnishee Notice came to be issued to the bank, in terms of Section 79(1)(c) of CGST Act, 2017. Therefore, initiating recovery proceedings even before the period given for filing reply is over, is in contravention of principles of natural justice. 18) Insofar as the period February 2018 to May 2018 is concerned, the Petitioner is said to have filed a valid return for part demand to the extent of Rs. 1,67,84,058/- within 30 days of service of assessment order and by virtue of Section 62(2) of the Act, the assessment order to the extent of which the valid return is filed is deemed to be withdrawn and only the liability of payment of interest shall continue and not the penalty pertaining to such valid return. 19) It is p....