2024 (7) TMI 1246

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... impugned order dated 10.06.2024 (Annexure -1) passed by the Respondent No.2, having been passed without jurisdiction and for being completely illegal and/ or; (ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondent no.2 to adjust the amount of IGST already paid by the petitioner against the demand of CGST and SGST in terms of Section 19 of the IGST Act read with Section 54 (10) of the CGST Act read with Rules framed thereunder, and accordingly to drop the demand of CGST and SGST Act read with Rules framed thereunder and accordingly to drop the demand of CGST and SGST confirmed against the petitioner. In addition, the respondent no.2 be also directed to drop the demand of interest and penalty in te....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....est and penalty. 4. The petitioner filed its reply on 07.10.2023 explaining that the petitioner has made inter state supply from its office in M.P. and not intra State supply from its satellite offices in U.P. Satellite offices in U.P. were facilitation centres. In any case GST has already been paid treating it as inter state supply and, therefore, tax could not be demanded again. The reply of the petitioner was not considered by the respondent no.2 but a demand order was issued on 12.10.2023 confirming demand of CGST and SGST on transactions on which IGST had already been paid by the petitioner. 5. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Assessing Authority the petitioner filed a writ petition before this Court and the writ petition was....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d supplying the same to various Government offices/ NGOs within the State of U.P. and it was intra state supply and not inter state supply. Opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner's representative was also personally heard before the order was passed. 9. The petitioner's contention that the petitioner had already paid IGST and on the same transaction CGST and SGST cannot be charged and penalty and interest on delayed payment cannot be charged, is a disputed question of fact which can be appropriately addressed by the appellate authority under Section 107 of the Act. 10. The Counsel for the petitioner has stated that no intra state supply was made, only inter state supply was made and the appointment letter was issue....