The initiation of the proceeding for imposition of tax and penalty was with the issuance of the notice under Section 74 and the inquiry under Section 70 of the Act was independent.
Section 70, 74 of CGST Act—Summon— In the instant case, the challenge is to the order passed u/s 74 of the U.P. GST which is pari materia to Section 74 of CGST Act.
The contention of petitioner is that once the Central Tax Authority had initiated action, the proceeding was required to be brought to its logical end by the same authority. The State Tax Authority could not have conducted the proceeding under Section 74 of the UPGST Act, 2017.
this Court finds that the summons dated 30.10.2018 had been issued while initiating inquiry under Section 70 of the CGST Act, 2017 which is a "judicial proceeding" within the meaning of Sections 193 and 228 of the Indian Penal Code, for providing punishment for furnishing false evidence and interruption to any public servant in discharge of his duties.
Whereas for determination of tax and penalty, the proceeding under Chapter XV had been initiated in accordance with the procedure prescribed under 74 of the Act.
Held that— In the considered opinion of the Court, the initiation of the proceeding for imposition of tax and penalty was with the issuance of the notice under Section 74 as contained in Chapter XV of UPGST Act and the inquiry under Section 70 of the Act was independent.
the prayer in the writ petition to quash the order is hereby rejected.
The initiation of the proceeding for imposition of tax and penalty was with the issuance of the notice under Section 74 and the inquiry under Section 70 of the Act was independent.
Section 70, 74 of CGST Act—Summon— In the instant case, the challenge is to the order passed u/s 74 of the U.P. GST which is pari materia to Section 74 of CGST Act.
The contention of petitioner is that once the Central Tax Authority had initiated action, the proceeding was required to be brought to its logical end by the same authority. The State Tax Authority could not have conducted the proceeding under Section 74 of the UPGST Act, 2017.
this Court finds that the summons dated 30.10.2018 had been issued while initiating inquiry under Section 70 of the CGST Act, 2017 which is a "judicial proceeding" within the meaning of Sections 193 and 228 of the Indian Penal Code, for providing punishment for furnishing false evidence and interruption to any public servant in discharge of his duties.
Whereas for determination of tax and penalty, the proceeding under Chapter XV had been initiated in accordance with the procedure prescribed under 74 of the Act.
Held that— In the considered opinion of the Court, the initiation of the proceeding for imposition of tax and penalty was with the issuance of the notice under Section 74 as contained in Chapter XV of UPGST Act and the inquiry under Section 70 of the Act was independent.
the prayer in the writ petition to quash the order is hereby rejected.