Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017 —– Demand - The petitioner sought direction quashing the order u/s.73 with a direction to adjudicate the matter afresh after providing an opportunity of hearing. It was alleged in the SCN for Rs. 36,15,696/- (with interest) that the petitioner was supplied nil rated or exempted supply, but it had not reversed the ITC related to the said exempt supply as per Section 17(2) of the CGST Act read with Rule 42. The search proceedings under Section 67(2) took place on 17.02.2022. The petitioner on 21.02.2022, reversed the ITC accounting to Rs.1,19,149/- along with the interest. Thereafter Notice was issued under Section 79(1)(c) of the Act and the Bank was asked to pay the amount of Rs.13,74,981/- and debit transactions were freezed. The court observed that the petitioner did not bother about the SCN for which, he had already asked for the adjournment, as every such action would be requiring the logical conclusion. The officer concerned cannot be held responsible, who already had availed him an opportunity of hearing. If the petitioner is desirous of going to the Appellate Authority for questioning and challenging the assessment which has been finalized and that being his right, if he has missed out on the limitation, condoning this period of limitation in the given circumstance, keeping the larger issue open, this petition is allowed.

Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court permitted the petitioner to challenge the impugned order, within two weeks. The appeal would be decided expeditiously on its own merit, after providing due opportunity. As the amount is already credited from the Bank account of the petitioner, he would be entitled to seek recredit, barring the amount of pre-deposit which shall be decided by the authority concerned including of the grant of further stay. Till the same is decided, there shall be no further coercive recovery and petitioner shall be entitled to operate the Bank account.