TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 112
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hatia and Mr. Aananya Jagannath Mishra, Advocates. For the Respondents: Mr. Nawal Kishore Jha, SPC with Ms. Kalpana Jha, Advocate for UOI/R-1 Mr. Rajeev Aggarwal, ASC with Ms. Samridhi Vats, Advocate JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL) 1. Petitioner impugns order dated 28.12.2023, whereby the impugned Show Cause Notice dated 24.09.2023, proposing a demand of Rs. 1,38,12,142.00 against the P....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....claimed from cancelled dealers, return defaulters and tax nonpayers. To the said Show Cause Notice, a detailed reply was furnished by the petitioner giving disclosures under each of the heads. 5. The impugned order, however, after recording the narration records that the reply uploaded by the taxpayer is not supported with complete relevant documents. It states that; "And whereas reply filed by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....evant document and also failed to establish the actual movement of goods. Further the above mentioned suppliers were cancelled from the date of registration and all the ITC passed by them becomes ineligible. Therefore the taxpayer is not entitled to get the benefit on the basis of its reply which is not supported with complete relevant documents. Hence the taxpayer is liable to pay the requisite d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r has not applied his mind to the reply submitted by the petitioner. 7. Further, if the Proper Officer was of the view that any further details or documents were required, the same could have been specifically sought from the Petitioner. However, the record does not reflect that any such opportunity was given to the Petitioner to clarify its reply or furnish further documents/details. 8. In view....