Orders passed u/s 74 of CGST Act is bad in law and completely without jurisdiction for the reason of non- compliance of mandatory requirement of Section 61 of CGST Act therefore the matter remanded back to the authority for consideration afresh.
Section 74 of the CGST Act — Demand Order -- Principal of Natural Justice-- The petitioner prayed for setting aside the order dated 31.01.2020 under Section 74(1), whereby it was observed that the petitioner in his Return submitted in GSTR-3B for the month of April 2019 to June 2019 shown supply of Rs.5197460/- whereas as per TDS Return GSTR-2A the supply appears to be Rs. 62534562/- and in this manner the petitioner concealed/suppressed/evaded supply of Rs. 10559962/- and accordingly Tax, Interest and Penalty was assessed for Rs. 3872760/-; (ii) for setting aside the order dated 02.03.2020, whereby final order has been passed under Section 74 (9) and it has been ordered to issue DRC-07 of Rs. 39,21,914/-; (iii) for setting aside the consequential DRC-07 dated 04.03.2020, The petitioner submitted that the order is completely without jurisdiction as same was issued without complying the mandatory requirement of Section 61. Further, the order is bad in law as the SCN was ordered to be issued on 16.01.2020, but same was served through mail only on 25.01.2020, on that day the father of the Tax Consultant had died and next day i.e. 26th January was a national holiday it was impossible to file reply in one day as the last date of submission of reply was 27.01.2020. The petitioner also prayed The order is bad in law and completely without jurisdiction for the reason of non- compliance of mandatory. The court observed that it is not disputed that one of the impugned orders stands passed in violation of principles of natural justice.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court set aside the impugned order dated 02.03.2020 and the resultant order dated 04.03.2020 and remanded the matter back to the authority for consideration afresh. The petitioner is directed to appear before the said authority on 12.10.2020, who shall, after complying with the principles of natural justice, pass a fresh order. It shall be open to the petitioner to raise all the issues, including the one agitated in the present petition, which the Officer shall be obliged to decide the same.
Orders passed u/s 74 of CGST Act is bad in law and completely without jurisdiction for the reason of non- compliance of mandatory requirement of Section 61 of CGST Act therefore the matter remanded back to the authority for consideration afresh.
Section 74 of the CGST Act — Demand Order -- Principal of Natural Justice-- The petitioner prayed for setting aside the order dated 31.01.2020 under Section 74(1), whereby it was observed that the petitioner in his Return submitted in GSTR-3B for the month of April 2019 to June 2019 shown supply of Rs.5197460/- whereas as per TDS Return GSTR-2A the supply appears to be Rs. 62534562/- and in this manner the petitioner concealed/suppressed/evaded supply of Rs. 10559962/- and accordingly Tax, Interest and Penalty was assessed for Rs. 3872760/-; (ii) for setting aside the order dated 02.03.2020, whereby final order has been passed under Section 74 (9) and it has been ordered to issue DRC-07 of Rs. 39,21,914/-; (iii) for setting aside the consequential DRC-07 dated 04.03.2020, The petitioner submitted that the order is completely without jurisdiction as same was issued without complying the mandatory requirement of Section 61. Further, the order is bad in law as the SCN was ordered to be issued on 16.01.2020, but same was served through mail only on 25.01.2020, on that day the father of the Tax Consultant had died and next day i.e. 26th January was a national holiday it was impossible to file reply in one day as the last date of submission of reply was 27.01.2020. The petitioner also prayed The order is bad in law and completely without jurisdiction for the reason of non- compliance of mandatory. The court observed that it is not disputed that one of the impugned orders stands passed in violation of principles of natural justice.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court set aside the impugned order dated 02.03.2020 and the resultant order dated 04.03.2020 and remanded the matter back to the authority for consideration afresh. The petitioner is directed to appear before the said authority on 12.10.2020, who shall, after complying with the principles of natural justice, pass a fresh order. It shall be open to the petitioner to raise all the issues, including the one agitated in the present petition, which the Officer shall be obliged to decide the same.