Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful)

TaxTMI AI Drafter workflow from input facts to final legal draft Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2022 (6) TMI 352

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Manek/1710/2021 U/s.132(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017(hereinafter referred to as CGST Act. 2. Perused the application. Heard both the sides. 3. As per case of the respondent, applicant is owner of M/s. Manek Steel LLP (hereinafter referred to as the firm) bearing GST No.27ABCFM3204DIZU and is involved in passing huge amount of inadmissible Input Tax Credit(hereinafter referred to as ITC) in fraudulent manner by the way of issuing bogus invoices without supply of any goods and availment of ITC on the basis of purchase invoices without receipt of goods. Said firm was having business at Shop No.B-15, Ground Floor, Gora Gandhi Palace, Plot No.122B, Khemraj Kisandas Marg, Khetwadi, Girgaon, Mumbai. Officer of the respo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lt of the tax was shown as Rs.5.24 Crores from July 2017 till date and if this taxes are calculated year wise, then it will be below Rs.5 Crores and it is bailable offence. On this ground also, liberty of the applicant be protected. He requested to allow the application. 5. On the contrary, officer of the respondent and SPP N. Natraja for the respondent opposed the application and argued that investigation is in progress. There is possibility that applicant could have availed ITC benefit illegally of more than Rs.25 Crores to 30 Crores. He further argued that suppliers of the firm of the applicant are not in existence as per physical visit to those firms, which shows that those firms were falsely created in order to avail illegal ITC. Th....