2024 (12) TMI 921

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....etitioner is engaged in business of manufacture of auto components and is registered under the Goods and Services Act, 2017. During the relevant period viz., 2017-18, the petitioner filed its return and paid the appropriate taxes. However, during the scrutiny of the petitioner's return, it was found that there was an excess availment of Input Tax Credit vis-a-vis Input Tax Credit reported in annual return in GSTR-9. Subsequently, a notice was issued to the petitioner in ASMT 10 on 03.02.2023. In response to the said notice, it was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that filling up S.No.14 of GSTR-9C for the financial year 2017-18 was not mandatory and thus certain columns in GSTR-9C was left unfilled. Pursuant thereto, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....544196 32544196 Conveyance charges       Bank Charges 555000 99900 99900 Entertainment Charges       Stationery Expenses (including postage etc.)       Repair and Maintenance 64272393.41 11415763 11415763 Other Miscellaneous expenses 10038117.31 480064 480064 Capital goods 100748064.9 7672238 7672238 Any other expense 1 26271185.76 4752657 4752657 Any other expense 2 3500248 273169 273169 Any other expense 3 (RCM ITC against RCM payment in GSTR 3B) 23254818 1617951 1617951 Total 3266882489 715102275 715102275   Less (ITC Not availed 17-18 and the same availed in FY 2018-19 as mentioned in GSTR 9C (FY 2017-18) Table 12     &n....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to furnish the same. 5. The present writ petition challenges the impugned order on the premise that it proceeds on the basis that the petitioner had not filed the ITC register or line-wise item-wise purchase list or purchase invoices to substantiate their claim. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that if the respondent authority was of the view that the documents filed were inadequate or insufficient, they ought to have put the petitioner on notice. The respondent authority has passed the orders without even intimating the petitioner of the need to furnish the documents in respect of all transactions. The petitioner would have furnished the same, if he was duly intimated. It was thus submitted that the impugned order....