AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (10) TMI 271
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hing the order-in-original bearing No. 12/2023-2024 CGST ND-1 dated 21.03.2024 and DIN-20240372MR0000611436 passed by the Respondent No. 1 for the tax period from January, 2019 to March, 2023 is enclosed herewith and marked as Annexure-A. ii) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a writ or certiorari quashing the show-cause notice bearing SCN No. 12/2023-24-MRU-AD dated 12.12.2023 and DIN-202312DSS10000414944 by the Respondent No. 2 for the tax period form January, 2019 to March, 2023 is enclosed herewith and marked as Annexure-B. iii) And pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity." 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learne....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-P. It is therefore submitted that the impugned assessment order deserves to be set aside and the matter may be remitted back to respondent No. 2 for verification of the payment made by service provider and to proceed further in the matter. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for respondents would support the impugned order and submit that there is no merit in the appeal and the same is liable to be dismissed. 6. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the issue in controversy involved in the present petition as regards liability of the petitioner to pay GST under reverse charge mechanism is squarely covered by the decision of the Honb'le Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.42/2022, wherein it has held as und....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... request made by the respondent for modification of the final order dated 24.03.2020 came to be rejected. Being aggrieved by the order dated 24.03.2020 passed by the Settlement Commission the respondent had approached the Writ Court. The learned Single Judge vide order dated 18.08.2021, allowed the Writ Petition in part quashing the impugned part of the orders and remitting the matter to the Settlement Commission for consideration afresh. Hence, this Writ Appeal by the Revenue. 3. The arguments of the learned counsel for the Revenue are two fold. Firstly, the assessee was required to strictly adhere to the provisions of Section 68 [2] of the Finance Act, 1994 amended from time to time. In terms of the said provision, the r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cannot be construed as shortage of payment of tax. 6. Nextly, it was argued that the law enunciated by the Hon'ble High Courts of Bombay, Gujarat and Punjab & Haryana in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Goa V/s. Essel Propack Ltd., [(2015) 57 taxmann.com 52 (Bombay)]; Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Vadodara-II V/s. Steelco Gujarat Ltd., [(2013) 3 taxmann.com 388 (Gujarat); Commissioner of Central Excise V/s. Ralson India Ltd., [(2007) 6 STT 134] being considered by the learned Single Judge while arriving at a conclusion that no denial could be made in admitting the Photostat copies of the documents when there was no dispute as to input credit tax/service of the genuineness of the claim, the same do not warrant....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e matter for fresh consideration mainly on the ground that the assessee is ready and willing to produce the original invoices. Hence, adjudicating upon the issue of award of CENVAT Credit on the basis of the Photostat copies of the documents would become academic. In the present set of facts, without dwelling upon the said issue, more particularly, in view of the assessee being ready and willing to produce the original invoices, we are disposing of this case confirming the order of remand. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal stands disposed of directing the Settlement Commission to re-consider the matter afresh in accordance with law and after notifying the assessee and the Revenue. All the rights and contentions of the parties are left o....