Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

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 (10) TMI 501

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d 19th September, 2022 in W.P.A. No.20025 of 2022 filed by the appellants. The said writ petition was filed praying for issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash the notices issued by the concerned CGST and CX Headquarters, Anti Evasion, Kolkata North Commissionerate insofar as it relates to financial year 2017-2018 to 2019 - 2020 for which an audit under Section 65 of the CGST Act, 2017 has been conducted by the superintendent of concerned CGST and CX, Circle - II, Kolkata Audit - I Commissionerate; for issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash the notices issued by the Superintendent of CGST & CX, Range -III, Barrackpore Division, Kolkata North Commissioenrate insofar as the same relates to the financial year 2017-2018 to 2019-2020 for wh....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of which two issues as pointed out by the audit was accepted by the appellants and the necessary tax and interest were remitted and for the remaining two issues, the appellants had submitted their response to the notice and the matter has not been taken to the logical end. In the meantime, the other two wings of the department, viz. Anti Evasion wing as well as the Range Office have also proceeded against the appellants by issuing notices for the very same period for which audit proceedings under Section 65 of the Act has already commenced. 6. The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents, on instructions, submitted that the three wings of the department are proceeding against the appellants because the Range office was not....