M/S. Venkatrama Constructions vs. Assistant Commissioner (State Tax)
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
The Court made the following order: (perHon’ble Sn Justice R. Raghunandan Rao) The petitioner who is in the business of execution of work contracts has approached this Court by way of the present Writ Petition challenging the show-cause notice, in Form GST DRC-01, dated 28.12.2023 on the ground that the same could not have been issued without prior issuance of Form GST DRC-01A, under the Rule 142(1 A) of the CGST Rules, ...RESPONDENT(S) 2017 and also on the ground that the show-cause notice does not contain a verifiable DIN number. I-
ed a counter affidavit stating that the prior notice, in Form GST DRC-01A, under the Rule 142(1A) of the CGST Rules, 2017 had not been issued to the petitioner.
The respondent has ^1
Commissioner (ST) & Ors^ had held that issuance of notice, under Rule 142(1 A) of the CGST Rules, 2017, for any pre-amendment period prior to October-2020 is mandatory and non issuance of such notice would render all further proceedings non-est.
Sri P. Karthik Ramana, learned counsel for the petitioner would also contend that the show-cause notice could not have been issued under Section 74 of the GST Act, in as much as the show-cause notice has been issued on the basis of the returns filed by the petitioner and no fresh material or additional material had been relied upon to contend that there has been willful suppression or misstatement of facts, by the petitioner, for attracting the provisions of Section 74 of the GST Act.
In view of the fact that, prior intimation in Form GST DRC-01A had not been issued, it would be appropriate to dispose of this Writ Petition by setting aside the impugned show-cause notice, dated 28.12.2023, leaving it open to the 1®‘ respondent to initiate proceedings in accordance with law and also after taking into account the submission of the petitioner that a notice under Section 74 of the GST Act could not have been issued when such a notice relies"^Riy upon the information submitted by the petitioner itself. 2023 [79] G.S.T.L. 430; MANU/AP/2323/2023. r"' 3 A it would also be necessary to record the concession made by the 6. / learned counsel for the petitioner, on behalf of the petitioner, that the issue of limitation would not be raised by the petitioner even if notice is issued under Section 73 of the GST Act. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no 7. order as to costs. As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. M PRABHAKAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTIotl^FICER //// To 1. The Assistant Commissioner (State Tax), Proddatur-ll Circle, Kadapa Division, Andhra Pradesh.
The Principal Secretary to Government Revenue (CT-II) Department, State of Andhra Pradesh, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Amaravathi, Guntur District.
The Secretary„Government of India, Union of India, Ministry of Finance 3rd Floor, Jeevan Deep Building, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110 001. 4. The Commissioner (GST), Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, GST Policy Wing, Government of India, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi.
One CC to Sri Karthik Ramana Puttamreddy Advocate [OPUC]
Two CCs to GP for Commercial Tax, High Court of Andhra [OUT]
Three CD Copies GSC Pradesh
HIGH COURT DATED;19/02/2025 \ ORDER WP.No.22808 of 2024 S 09 MAY 2025 S . Current Section . ^ .«!> DISPOSING OF THE WP WITHOUT COSTS
Reproduced from the public record of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.