Petitioner | M/S. Blue Ocean Personnel & Allied Services Private Limited |
Respondent | The Superintendent of GST & Central Excise |
Decision by | Madras High Court |
Date of order or Judgement | 16-June-2022 |
Citation no. | 2022 (6) GSTPanacea 24 HC Madras W.P.No.14974 of 2022 |
Hon’ble Judge | Justice Anita Sumanth |
Decision | In Favour of Assessee |
The parties deliberate upon the matter and arrive at a proper quantification of the demand, pursuant to which fresh demand alongwith interest payable may be raised.
Proper Quantification of Demand-Facts Of The Case
Petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari challenging order dated 25.04.2022 demanding interest in terms of Section 50 of the CGST Act, 2017 for the period July, 2017 to September, 2021.
Argument in the Court
Proper Quantification of Demand-What is disputed is quantification of interest by the authority in the impugned communication.
The petitioner states that the demand raised now relates to a period commencing from 2017, which is 5 years prior to the present period. Therefore, have sought some time to peruse the computation annexed.
Above all, it has also enclosed a statement of accounts detailing its quantification of the IGST, CGST and SGST.
Since there is no response till date to the request seeking personal hearing, the present Writ Petition has come to be filed challenging the quantification in the impugned order.
Madras High Court Held
What remains is only a proper quantification of the demand based on the rival quantifications between the Department and the petitioner.
Therefore, HC Directs petitioner to appear before the respondent without expecting any further notice in this regard.
The parties deliberate upon the matter and arrive at a proper quantification of the demand, pursuant to which fresh demand of interest payable may be raised.
The impugned order is therefore set aside.
Download PDF
Blue Ocean
For Reference Visit:
Madras High Court