TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 1136
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uant thereto, an Observation Memo dated 06.11.2023 came to be issued upon scrutiny/verification of the petitioner's records during audit, and the said Observation Memo indicated a GST liability of Rs.49,52,923/-. 4. On 07.11.2023, as per the petitioner, the said amount of Rs.49,52,923/- through DRC-03, which was made during audit, was paid without contest. 5. Thereafter, on 16.11.2023, an email was issued from the office of respondent no. 3 calling for copies of contracts. Subsequently, Audit Report No. 728/2023-24 dated 23.01.2024 was issued. The petitioner filed a reply dated 05.02.2024 to the Audit Report. 6. In the meantime, Form DRC-01A dated 31.01.2024, bearing Reference No. 464, was issued to the petitioner with reference to Audit Para VII, and according to the petitioner's own Show Cause Notice ["SCN"] reply, audit paras I to VI stood settled and the dispute thereafter proceeded in respect of audit para VII. A reply to the said DRC-01A was also filed by the petitioner. 7. Thereafter, SCN No. 09/2024-25 along with SCN in Form DRC-01 dated 09.04.2024, later followed by a corrigendum dated 13.11.2024, was issued to the petitioner. As noticed in the SCN, it was prop....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at the present writ petition came to be filed before this Court, wherein the petitioner has sought quashing of the impugned OIO dated 31.01.2025 and dispensation of the requirement of pre-deposit on the ground that an amount of Rs.49,52,923/- had already been paid on 07.11.2023 during the course of audit as part of admitted liability. 14. When the present matter was taken up on 30.04.2025 for the first time, this Court crystallised the grounds raised in the petition and identified the specific issue that arose for consideration in the matter. Inasmuch as the said order narrows the scope of adjudication, the relevant paras thereof are reproduced below for the sake of clarity: "4. The broad grounds raised by Mr. Abhishek A Rastogi, ld. Counsel for the Petitioner are as under: (i) In the Audit Observation Memo dated 6th November 2023, the differentiation of contract of works service taxed at 12%and the second category of service tax for supply of goods at 18% was not raised in the Observation Memo. (ii) Moreover, multiple years have been clubbed in the Show Cause Notice and common demands have been raised. (iii) That penalty has been imposed unde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... It is on this basis that the petitioner contends that the ratio of the said judgments cannot be mechanically applied to the present dispute. 17. It is also urged on behalf of the petitioner, with reference to the written submissions, that several Benches of the Bombay High Court, after considering the very judgments of this Court relied upon by the respondents, have consciously taken a different view in matters not involving ITC fraud, including Milroc Good Earth Developers v. Union of India & Ors. (2025) 36 CENTAX 97, Rite Water Solutions (India) Ltd. v. Joint Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Nagpur & Ors. 2025:BHC-NAG:13213-DB, M/s Paras Stone Industries v. Union of India & Ors. 2026:BHC-NAG:339-DB and AR Traders, through its proprietor Shri Abdul Rashid v. Joint Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Nagpur 2026:BHC-NAG:732-DB. The petitioner specifically relies upon Milroc Good Earth Developers to contend that the Bombay High Court distinguished Ambika Traders on the footing that the facts before the Delhi High Court related to wrongful availment of ITC over subsequent years, whereas the matter before it arose in a different factual and legal setting. It is also pointed o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nguage used in section 74(3) of the CGST Act and section 74(4) of the CGST Act is "for any period" and "for such periods" respectively. This contemplates that a notice can be issued for a period which could be more than one financial year. Similar is the language even in section 73 of the CGST Act. The relevant provisions read as under: "73. Determination of tax, pertaining to the period up to financial year 2023-2024, not paid or short paid or erroneously refunded or input-tax credit wrongly availed or utilised for any reason other than fraud or any wilful misstatement or suppression of facts.- (1) and (2)... (3) Where a notice has been issued for any period under sub-section (1), the proper officer may serve a statement, containing the details of tax not paid or short paid or erroneously refunded or input-tax credit wrongly availed or utilised for such periods other than those covered under sub-section (1), on the person chargeable with tax. (4) The service of such statement shall be deemed to be service of notice on such person under sub-section (1), subject to the condition that the grounds relied upon for such tax periods other than those co....