2025 (1) TMI 210

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f jurisdiction. The impugned order is also challenged on the premise that it raises demand in excess of the amount of taxes proposed in the show cause notice thereby violating the mandate contained in Section 75 (7) of the Act and thus violates principles of natural justice. 2. The petitioner is engaged in manufacturing and trading of various personal grooming and oral care products. The petitioner is a registered dealer under Goods and Services Act, 2017. During the relevant period, the petitioner had filed its return and paid appropriate taxes. While scrutinizing the petitioner's return, it was found that there was mismatch between GSTR 3B and GSTR 2A/ 2B. Subsequently, a notice in ASMT-10 was issued on 15.11.2023 and another notic....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....6,85,70,765 6,85,70,765 3,32,697 13,74,74,227 Total 128,65,37,850 128,65,37,850 62,42,123 257,93,17,823 4. It is also the submission of the learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner that the enhanced/ increased demand is in view of the fact that the impugned order levies tax on transactions of supply effected at PAN India level i.e., levy of tax in respect of supplies effected outside the State of Tamil Nadu which is wholly bad for want of jurisdiction. It was also submitted that the majority of the supplies have also been subject to tax particularly in Mumbai where they have the Head Office. Thus, the impugned order could possibly result in levy of tax on supplies which have already suffered tax in other jurisdi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pportunity to reply becomes illusory and the notice would be an empty formality if the order is made on new / different grounds from the notice*. 8. The learned counsel for the petitioner would place reliance upon the recent judgment of this Court in the case of Sree Manoj International Vs. Deputy State Tax Officer in W.P.No.10977 of 2024 dated 25.04.2024, to submit that this court has remanded the matter back in similar circumstances subject to payment of 10% of the disputed taxes. The learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner would also submit that they may be provided with one final opportunity to put forth their objections and would submit that they are ready and willing to pay 10% of disputed taxes of Rs. 6,56,80,225/- as proposed ....