2023 (4) TMI 1219

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... dated 21.11.2022 rejecting the appeal filed by the appellant as time barred. On a cursory glance of the order passed by the appellate authority one gets impression that the order is perfectly legal and valid as the appeal was hopelessly time barred and the authority had no power to condone the delay in filing the appeal. However, on a closer scrutiny of the facts and circumstances of the case, it would lead to a different conclusion. The appellants were served with an intimation of the tax ascertained as being payable under Sections 73(5) and 74(5) of the Goods & Services Tax Act dated 05.03.2021. In the said intimation which is in Form GST DRC-01A, the grounds and quantification were mentioned and the appellants were advised to pay the ta....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sentation/reply and if not satisfied, could have proceeded to issue show cause notice under Section 74(1) of the Act which option the first respondent did not exercise and the matter was left to linger. Thus, the preliminary proceedings could not have been initiated by the second respondent when proceeding initiated by the first respondent for the very same amount on the very same allegation was not taken to the logical end. When the statutory appeal was pending before the appellate authority, the first respondent had dropped the proceedings. It is very crucial to note that from the final report of the first respondent it is seen that the proceedings was closed by the first respondent only on 24.01.2023. Thus, for all purposes, it is deemed....