Taran Angad Traders (P,) Ltd. v, Union of India

The petitioner, an assessee under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act, has approached the Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to challenge a show cause notice issued to them on 26-09-2023 (referred to as Annexure P-8). The notice cites reasons for its issuance, primarily focusing on discrepancies found during the scrutiny of the petitioner’s GSTR-9 return for the period 2017-18. It was noted that the petitioner declared an Input Tax Credit (ITC) reversal of Rs. 1,49,90,443/- in table 12 of GSTR-9 but did not reverse the same in any of the monthly GSTR 3B returns of the subsequent financial year until March 2019. Additionally, it was observed that excess ITC of Rs. 1,48,32,806/- had been claimed by the petitioner without reversal or payment of interest on such excess utilization. The notice provides specific figures related to CGST, SGST, and IGST for clarity.

During the proceedings, Shri Praveen Surange, Advocate, representing the respondent, raised an objection to the maintainability of the writ petition. He argued that the petition challenges the show cause notice for which a reply had already been filed.

In response, Shri Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner, attempted to address the objections raised by the respondent’s counsel. However, the summary does not provide further details on the arguments presented by Shri Dwivedi.

Overall, the case revolves around the petitioner’s challenge to a show cause notice issued regarding discrepancies in their GST returns, specifically related to the declaration and reversal of Input Tax Credit. The respondent’s counsel has contested the maintainability of the writ petition on the grounds of a prior reply filed by the petitioner.

The summary provided describes a legal situation involving a show cause notice issued by a tax assessing officer in the context of the GST Act. Here’s a breakdown of the key points:

Challenge to the Show Cause Notice: The petitioner (presumably a taxpayer or entity) has challenged the validity of a show cause notice issued by a tax assessing officer. The challenge encompasses both jurisdictional issues and the merits of the demands made in the notice.

Response Filed by the Petitioner: The petitioner has responded to the show cause notice by filing a reply. This action is significant because it implies that the petitioner has accepted the jurisdiction of the assessing authority.

Court’s Position: The court, in response to the petitioner’s challenge, refuses to delve into the specifics of the jurisdictional issues and merits raised in the petition. Instead, it suggests that if the petitioner wishes to further address these concerns, they should do so by filing an additional reply that incorporates the arguments presented before the court.

Expectation from the Authority: The court expresses its hope and trust that the assessing authority will thoroughly consider the issues raised in both the initial reply and any additional submissions made by the petitioner. The authority is expected to make a decision based on the provisions of the GST Act while maintaining judicial discipline, indicating a fair and impartial assessment.

Disposition of the Writ Petition: The court concludes by disposing of the writ petition, indicating that its involvement in the matter has ended. The petitioner is granted the opportunity to obtain a certified copy of the court’s decision as per the rules.

In essence, the summary outlines a legal process where a petitioner challenges a show cause notice, the court refrains from adjudicating on the specifics, and instead, directs the petitioner to further engage with the assessing authority. The court emphasizes the importance of a fair and thorough review by the authority in accordance with the relevant legal framework.

Download Pdf:
TARAN ANGAD TRADERS PVT. LTD

For Reference Visit:
Madhya Pradesh High Court

Read Another Case law:
GST Case Law