The show cause notice issued to the Petitioner did not quantify the proposed demand of interest. However, the interest demand was quantified in the order-in-original. The Petitioner contended that, unless interest was demanded in the notice, it cannot form part of the order-in-original. Reliance was placed on Section 75(7) of the CGST Act, 2017, which […]
U/s.35(6), if the registered person fails to account for the goods / services, the proper officer shall determine the tax payable, as if such goods / services were supplied and ss.73/74 shall apply for determination of tax. On the other hand, s.130 provides for confiscation and penalty u/s.122 where any person does not account for any goods on which he is liable to pay tax. Nevertheless, after issuing a notice u/s.130, tax and penalty cannot be determined u/ss.73/74 whatsoever.
Petitioner failed to reply to the notice u/s.61 of the CGST Act, 2017 as well as show cause notice (SCN) u/s.73 ibid. Hence, opportunity of personal hearing was not demanded by the petitioner. There was no application even to seek an extension of time to file a reply. [dated 09.07.2024, in Chaudhary Associates Lko. v. […]
[dated 01.07.2024, in Raju Sreedharan v. Superintendent, Central Tax & Central Excise, from W.P. (C) No. 9681 of 2024] In Anishia Chandrakanth v. Superintendent, Central Tax & Central Excise [W.P.(C) No.30644 of 2023], the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala (vide order dated dated 09.04.2024) observed as follows: It is not in dispute that the GST […]