2024 (8) TMI 770

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ge 56), whereby the petitioners, have been assessed to GST to the tune of Rs. 14,77,371/- for the duration of July, 2017 to March, 2018, on account of purchase made by the petitioners, which includes interest and penalty. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits, that the GST registration of the petitioners was cancelled by an order dated 28.4.2020 (page No.40), which cancellation was w.e.f. 01.02.2020. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits, that since this order of cancellation, did not indicate that any amount was recoverable from the petitioners on account of MGST or CGST as indicated in the said order, the action initiated under Section 73 of the GST Act read with Rule 142 framed thereunder, was without jurisdiction. He....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....iable to pay tax, which could also be done post the cancellation. Though M/s World Steel Tech (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Gujarat, Special Civil Application No. 20034/2022, decided on 01.12.2022, has been relied upon, it would, however, be material to note, that it does not consider the language of Section 29 (3) of the GST Act, considering which, it has no applicability in the present matter. We are, therefore, not inclined to accept this submission. The same is rejected. 3. The next ground raised by the petitioners is that the impugned order dated 09.1.2023 (page 56) is bad in law, for denial of an opportunity of hearing, which according to him is reflected on the face of the record, for which, he invites our attention to the notices ....