2026 (4) TMI 1814

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Notice having a reference no. ZD2701240703340 dated 30.01.2024 (Exhibit -D) Impugned Rectification Order having a reference no. ZD270325113099G dated 21.03.2025 (Exhibit-J) passed by the Respondents. b. that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any Writ, Order or Direction of similar nature to forthwith withdraw the Impugned Show Cause Notice having a reference no. ZD2701240703340 dated 30.01.2024 (Exhibit -D) Impugned Rectification Order having a reference no. ZD270325113099G dated 21.03.2025 (Exhibit-J) passed by the Respondents. c. that pending the hearing and final disposal of the present petition, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to stay the Impugned Show Cause Notice....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... with interest and penalty, once again not taking into consideration the submissions of the Petitioner. v. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the Petitioner filed Writ Petition (St) No. 13705 of 2024 before this Court challenging the aforesaid order passed by Respondent No. 1. This Court, by an order dated 22nd August 2024, quashed and set aside the orders-in-original dated 12th December 2023 and 5th March 2024 passed by Respondent No. 1, and the matter was remanded back to Respondent No. 1 for de novo consideration. The order dated 22nd August 2024 passed by this Court in Writ Petition (St) No. 13705 of 2024 is reproduced hereinbelow:- "P.C. : 1. Ms Chavan on instructions states that respondent no.1 will pas....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d order"), confirming the demand of Rs. 1,48,62,491/-, along with interest and penalty. vii. It is in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts that the Petitioner, being aggrieved by the impugned order has filed the present Petition. 3. Mr. Keval Shah along with Mr, Rohil Pahilwan appeared for Petitioner, and Ms. Shruti Vyas, Addl. G.P., along with Mr, Aditya R. Deolekar appeared for the Respondents. We have perused the papers and proceedings with the assistance of the learned Counsel for the parties. 4. It is the contention of Mr. Shah, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, that the impugned order has been passed without dealing/adverting to the submissions made by the Petitioner at the time of the personal hearing, as we....