TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 906
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... this Court by consent of the parties, has taken up for hearing of the writ petition itself. 2. The writ petitioner by the instant writ petition seeks to challenge not only the adjudication order passed under Section 73(9) of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) for the tax period of 2017-18 and 2018-19 but also two seperate appellate order passed under Section 107 of the said Act both dated 23rd March, 2023 whereby not only the demand raised by the respondents in form GST DRC 07 had been confirmed but at the instance of the department, in a separate appeal the appellate authority had enhanced the penalty from Rs. 1,00,000/- to Rs. 3,80,597/-. 3. To appreciate the contention of the parties, it is relevant....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of Rs. 19,02,986/- by passing an order under Section 73(9) of the said Act. The demand was raised in form GST DRC 07 on 25th October, 2021. In addition thereto, the proper officer had also imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- in terms of Section 73(1) read with Section 73(9) of the said Act. Not only the petitioner being aggrieved with the aforesaid preferred appeal but records would reveal that the department also chose to prefer appeal under Section 107 of the said Act, insofar as the imposition of penalty was concerned. The department insisted that higher amount of penalty should be imposed. 6. By an order dated 22nd March, 2023, the petitioner's appeal was rejected. Insofar as the appeal filed by the department was concerned, the appe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by relying on annexure P1 to the writ petition which is a voluntary payment receipt of ITC made in form GST DRC 03 dated 31st January, 2020 that entire amount of tax which is claimed to be short paid has already been paid by the petitioner. She would submit that since the very demand raised by the respondents no longer survives especially, having regard to Section 16(5) of the said Act, the penalty imposed by the respondents needs to be revisited and reconsidered. Accordingly, the matter may be remanded back on the aforesaid score. 8. Mr. Dey, learned advocate appears for the CGST authorities. He would submit that having regard to the insertion of Section 16(5), the petitioner may be entitled to the benefit thereof. Insofar as the payme....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (GSTR 9) submitted for the period 2017-18 and utilized the sand irregularly availed credit for payment of taxes on outward supply as detailed in 'Annexure B' to this notice; iii) The said taxpayer have short paid GST to the extent of Rs. 52, 208/- (CGST Rs. 26,104/+ SGST Rs. 26,104/-) as they have shown excess clearance to the tune of Rs 2,90,042/- in their GSTR 1 for the month of August 2017 in comparison to GSTR 3B for the same period as detailed in 'Annexure - C' to this notice." 10. As would appear from the first issue in the show-cause, the same primarily relates to delayed filing of returns which having regard to the provisions of Section 16(4) of the said Act created an impediment on the registered tax pa....