TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (8) TMI 766
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Gokul Kishore For the Respondents : Mr. V. Prashanth Kiran, Government Advocate (Tax) ORDER An order in original dated 17.11.2023 is assailed on the ground of non-application of mind and failure to consider the material placed on record by the petitioner. 2. The petitioner received a show cause notice dated 09.05.2023 in respect of multiple heads of demand. The said show cause notice was repl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d by the petitioner was disregarded while arriving at the conclusion. As regards the tax proposal relating to excess availment of Input Tax Credit, he submits that the petitioner had submitted certificates from suppliers but not from the Chartered Accountant of such suppliers. 4. In addition to all these submissions, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is vitiated b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hin the 180 day period. This conclusion is entirely speculative and, therefore, calls for interference. As regards the tax proposal relating to excess input tax credit being availed, in respect of supplies where the difference in ITC is more than Rs. 5 lakhs, the petitioner should have produced certificates from the chartered accountants of the suppliers' concerned. This does not appear to hav....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppear to be prima facie untenable, revenue interest is required to be protected. Towards such end, the petitioner is directed to remit a sum of Rs. 25 lakhs towards the disputed tax demand within 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On instructions, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner agrees to make such remittance. 8. For reasons set out above, imp....