2025 (11) TMI 491

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....petitioner submits that the petitioner is a private limited company having GSTIN number. The petitioner is engaged in the business of sponge iron and MS ingots. He further submits that on 01.12.2018, the business premises of the petitioner was surveyed, on the basis of which the alleged stock was noted without making actual weighment and only by eye measurement and without physical accounting of stock of goods, raw materials, finished goods available at the business premises, etc. Thereafter, vide order dated 20.06.2020, penalty under section 130(3) of the GST Act read with section 122 was imposed, against which the petitioner preferred an appeal, which was allowed and the demand of tax, penalty and fine was quashed by the first appellate a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....arned counsel for the parties, the Court has perused the record. 8. The record shows that the business premises of the petitioner was surveyed on 01.12.2018. At the time of survey, 220 ton of sponge iron stock was alleged to be found in excess. Other materials were also found. Further, the suppressed production was alleged to be made on the basis of consumption of electricity and excess weightage was also found other than declared by the petitioner. The appeal of the petitioner has partly been allowed reducing the liability, instead of allowing the same in toto. 9. The record further shows that none of the authorities below has recorded finding against the petitioner that the petitioner has used ITC by reason of fraud, mis-statement o....