2024 (7) TMI 1102

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Ramamoorthy For the Petitioner : Mr. P. Rajkumar For the Respondents 1,2 : Mr. C. Harsha Raj, AGP (T) ORDER An order in original dated 30.01.2024 is assailed on the ground that the petitioner's reply was not taken into consideration. Upon scrutiny of the petitioner's return, an ASMT 10 notice was issued on 15.03.2023. Since the petitioner did not reply thereto, show cause noti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ards the issue relating to ITC mismatch, he submits that contradictory findings were entered to the effect that the tax payer did not file objections and that the tax payer's reply was considered. He also points out that an issue relating to Section 16(4) was raised in the impugned order although not mentioned in the show cause notice. With regard to the e-way bill mismatch, he submits that it....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... that the ITC available in GSTR 2A exceeds that availed of in GSTR 3B was not considered. Similarly, with regard to the turnover mismatch between the petitioner's GSTR 1 return and the e-way bill portal, the petitioner's reply to the effect that the tax liability was discharged was not taken into consideration. Consequently, the matter requires re-consideration. 5. For reasons aforesaid....