Section 74 of the IGST Act, 2017 — Demand — Input Service Distributor -- The petitioner challenged the order dated 28th March, 2022 under Section 74 of the Act. The Petitioner submitted that they have paid GST under RCM on bid premium, royalty, DMF, NMET, NPV, etc. (towards availing of licensing services for right to use minerals). They have distributed the amount of ITC to their other units located in the States of Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra and Karnataka. The revenue objected such procedure in claiming adjustment of unutilized input tax credit and issued notice which culminated in demand of Rs.901,48,27,137/-. The respondent counsel opposed admission of the petition on availability of alternative remedy under Section 107 of the Act. Further, Rule 54 specifies that ISD is required to issue tax invoice having the same PAN and State Code as an ISD. The court observed that it is the Jsw steel ltd.-ISD Mumbai which has been awarded with the contract for four mines in the State of Odisha and therefore whatever tax has been deposited by its unit in Odisha, the same is actually paid on behalf of the Jsw steel ltd.- ISD in Maharashtra, which is not supported by any documentary evidence nor has the statutory backing. It is necessary that the ISD as an office is required to receive tax invoices towards inward supply. Since no such supply being shown to have been made by Jsw steel ltd. of Odisha to Jsw steel ltd. of Maharashtra, no prima facie case is made out by the Petitioner. Thus transactions in question prima facie amount to siphoning of tax amounts, therefore, apparently warrant invocation of proceeding under Section 74 of the Act. The respondent prayed for waiver of notice.

Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court List this matter on 12th August, 2022.