TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (7) TMI 1023
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pendra Badgoti. For the Respondent Nos. 5 & 6 : Mr. Bharat Vyas, AAG assisted by Ms. Pratyushi Mehta ORDER PER 1. Petitioner has filed this Civil Writ Petition inter alia claiming following reliefs:- "i. To call for the record from the office of the respondents for its kind perusal; ii. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ or writs for quashing the impugned notice dated 06.03.2023 (Annexure-5) issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods and Service Tax Audit Circle, Jaipur 'A', Jaipur and declare and same to the contrary to Section 65 read with Section 2 (94) of the CGST/RGST Act, 2017 and without jurisdiction; iii. Declare that all the consequential proceedings initiated in pursua....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....CGST Act, any assessment order passed in pursuance thereof, deserves to be quashed. It is also contended that a Show Cause Notice was issued to the petitioner on 01.06.2023. Petitioner submitted a detailed reply to the Show Cause Notice, but the impugned order dated 30.11.2023, does not take note of the objections raised by the petitioner and it is a non-speaking order. It is further contended that since proceedings itself are contrary to law, the High Court can quash the proceedings in writ jurisdiction. 4. Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on "Tvl. Raja Stores vs. The Assistant Commissioner (ST) MANU/TN/6752/2023" wherein, learned Single Judge of the Madras High Court has held that audit can be conducted only against a reg....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent order. It is also contended that appeal lies against the assessment order. Petitioner has fraudulently availed the ITC and thereafter, had applied for cancellation of his registration. A person who has committed fraud on the exchequer cannot avail the benefit under the writ jurisdiction. It is contended that under Section 35 of the CGST Act, a registered person is required to maintain his accounts and records, and an audit is merely to ascertain whether some amount is outstanding towards the registered person. With regard to judgment cited by counsel for the petitioner, it is contended that it is not having any persuasive value. The High Court in that case had directed the Authorities to proceed under Section 73 and 74 of the CGST Act, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ke audit of any registered person for such period. 12. Admittedly, the petitioner was a registered person for the period for which the assessment order has been passed and notice dated 06.03.2020 to initiate audit has been issued. It is also pertinent to note that after audit, show cause notice was issued under Section 73 of the CGST Act and a detailed reply was filed by the petitioner and only thereafter, an assessment order has been passed against the petitioner. 13. Considering the above, we do not find any error in the proceedings initiated by respondents as registered person under Section 65 of the CGST Act would include those who were registered for the period for which audit was undertaken. The petitioner, who has fraudulently ....