2024 (5) TMI 316

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....VAGNANAM, C.J.) 1. This intra-Court is directed against the order dated 4th December, 2023 in W.P.A. 25725 of 2023, by which the writ petition, which was filed by the appellant challenging an assessment order passed under the W.B.G.S.T. Act, was dismissed on the ground that it is an appealable order. When the appeal was heard on 22nd December, 2023, the impugned assessment order in the writ petition was stayed subject to the condition that the appellant/assessee deposits 10% of the disputed tax within a time frame, which condition has been complied with. 2. Subsequently, the matter was heard at length and on 2nd April, 2024 the following order was passed:- 1. "We have heard the learned advocates for the parties. 2. T....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ent no. 4 in the appeal and affidavit-of-service has been filed, none of them have entered appearance on behalf of the State of Telangana. 9. We find that the stand taken by the State of Telangana would be very relevant for the purpose of adjudicating this appeal. 10. Therefore, we grant liberty to the learned advocate appearing for the appellant to serve full set of papers in this appeal petition including the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the State of West Bengal in the office of the learned Additional Advocate General for the State of Telangana so as to enable the State of Telangana to enter appearance in this proceeding. 11. Leave is granted to the respondent No. 2 viz. the private party to file its affidav....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rding to petitioner the IGST ITC to the tune of Rs. 1,31,45,290.00 pertaining to the invoices 1Z11801869 AND 1Z11801870 both dated 16-02-2018 and raised by Mphasis Limited (Respondent 2) are included in it. Though no mention of the same is found in GSTR-2A (available in the server on a later date) for February 2018. 3. Petitioner did not avail any IGST ITC in March 2018 but he had IGST ITC to the tune of Rs. 1,31,45,290.00 from Mphasis Limited (Respondent 2) in his GSTR-2A (available in the server on a later date) though against Invoices 1Z11801869A AND 1Z11801870A both dated 31-03-2018. The No and date of the Invoices are different with respect to the original ones upon which petitioner has claimed ITC. 4. According to pe....