TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 434
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: "A. Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction calling for the records in respect of the order dated 06.01.2025 (Annexure B) passed by the respondent; B. Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the notice dated 03.08.2024 (Annexure A) issued by the respondent authorities since the same is arbitrary, excessive, unjust and unfair and illegal and without jurisdiction and against the settled principles of the law; C. Your Lordships may be pleased t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lleged to be disputed amounting to Rs. 115,60,11,418/-. 3.3 It is the case of the petitioner that right from the issuance of the show cause notice till passing of the impugned Order-in-Original passed by the respondent, only five products viz. Manpasand Fruits Up (Sparkling Grape Fruit Drink), Manpasand Fruits Up (Sparkling Lemon Fruit Drink), Manpasand Jeera Sip, Manpasand Aprilla (Sparkling Apple Fruit Drink) and Manpasand Fruits Up (Sparkling Orange Fruit Drink) were the subject matter of investigation/inquiry and the issue raised in the show-cause notice that the aforesaid five drinks are not required to be considered as fruit juices because since the same are containing less than five percentage quantity of fruit contents as per FSSAI....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....icer has taken the entire supply value on the basis that the petitioner has self-declared the supply of Rs. 693,92,53,454/- of the impugned products under HSN 22029020 till December 2017 and under HSN 2202 from January 2018 and therefore, instead of taking turnover of Rs. 115,60,11,418/-, into consideration the respondent-authority has considered the entire turnover of the petitioner. 4.2 Learned Senior Advocate Mr. Hemani also invited the attention of the Court to the details of the bifurcation of the product-wise-break-up of the sales turnover of the products during the disputed period (page 108) to point out that there are different products manufactured by the petitioner having turnover in two categories i.e. of non-carbonated fruit dr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....de, they have submitted different calculation of the supply of their impugned products vide the aforesaid replies without any justification/reconciliation of the same with the value self-declared in their periodical GSTR-1 Returns filed by them with the department in GST Portal. Accordingly, I find that the taxpayer has self assessed the GST leviable on the said goods around @ 12% applicable to "Fruit Juice or Fruit pulp based drinks" In fact, the goods actually being manufactured by them i.e. Carbonated/Aerated Beverages attract GST @28% + Compensation Cess @12%. Accordingly, the taxpayer have evaded GST to the tune of Rs. 110,50,86,741/- (Rs.77,00,26,989/- IGST + Rs. 16,75,89,876/- CGST+ Rs. 16,75,89,876/- SGST) along with Compensation C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....xceptional circumstances where there is: (i) a breach of fundamental rights; (ii) a violation of the principles of natural justice; (iii) an excess of jurisdiction; or (iv) a challenge to the vires of the statute or delegated legislation. 12. In the present case, none of the above exceptions was established. There was, in fact, no violation of the principles of natural justice since a notice was served on the person in charge of the conveyance. In this backdrop, it was not appropriate for the High Court to entertain a writ petition. The assessment of facts would have to be carried out by the appellate authority. As a matter of fact, the High Court has while doing this exercise proceeded on the basis of surmises. However, since we ....