TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (8) TMI 945
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....santhamala Government Advocate (Taxes) ORDER This writ petition has been filed challenging the order in Form GST DRC - 07 in GSTIN: 33AAGPE0732P1ZU/2021-2022 and the consequential order in Reference No.ZD3308231060700, dated 18.08.2023, passed by the respondent. 2. According to the petitioner, they are a registered dealer on the files of the respondent and GST Department. For the Financial Year....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he tax along with penalty at Rs. 5,03,004/-. Upon receipt of the same, the petitioner filed its reply dated 23.03.2023 enclosing the necessary bills. Despite this, the respondent issued notices on 08.05.2023, 19.07.2023 and 02.08.2023 for personal hearing of the petitioner. Subsequently, the orders dated 18.08.2023 impugned in this writ petition, came to be passed by the respondent. Aggrieved by t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....had not replied within the stipulated time, whereas, according to the petitioner, the accountant, who ought to have filed the reply, left his job and hence, the reply could not be filed within the time. Hence, the learned counsel prayed to direct the respondent to consider the reply submitted by the petitioner and grant one more opportunity to substantiate its claim. 4. On the other hand, the lea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... respect of tax liability of the petitioner in GSTR 1 and GSTR 3B for the month of July, 2021. According to the petitioner, they filed its reply dated 01.11.2022 to the notice issued under section 61 stating that there was a clerical error in GSTR 3B and GSTR 1 has been filed correctly and that, they also produced the necessary bills for the same. However, the respondent has not considered the sam....