2022 (2) TMI 1078

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... ACHINTYA MALLA BUJOR BARUA Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. M Bhattacharjee Advocate for the Respondent : SC, GST JUDGMENT Heard Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. G. Hazarika, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. The petitioner M/S B G Engineering Co. is an assessee under the GST laws bearing registration No. AIKPB3945MST001. For the purpose of paym....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ty amount the petitioner was liable to pay was Rs. 1,25,629.20 paisa and the payment was required to have been made before 30.06.2020. As the petitioner had paid an amount of Rs. 1,25,629.60 paisa in place of Rs. 1,25,629.20 paisa as was assessed, the payment was rejected, meaning thereby that by virtue of such rejection the petitioner was refused the benefit of the SVLDRS allowance scheme. On a r....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....25,629.60 paisa. It is taken note of that the amount of Rs. 1,25,629.60 was paid on or before the last date and the only discrepancy was that instead of Rs. 1.25,629.20 paisa, an amount of Rs. 1,25,629.60 paisa was paid, i.e. 0.40 paisa more. In the circumstance, it cannot be said that the petitioner had not paid the tax amount to the department on or before the last date of such payment under the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....equent payment of the petitioner cannot be said to be a late offer of payment and it has to be construed to be an act of repayment of the amount which was already paid earlier but was rejected. 6. In view of the above, interest of justice will be made if the amount required to be paid by the petitioner is paid and the department accepts it to be the payment that was made on or before 30.06.2020. ....