M/S. Chendur Construction Company vs. The Superintendent
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Before: and
The petitioner has challenged in this writ petition Order in Original No. 8/2019 (GST) bearing Ref.No.319/2019 dated 09.08.2019. 2.By the impugned order, the respondent, as the proper Officer under the provisions of CGST Act, 2017 has confirmed the demand proposed in the show cause notice in O.C.No.29/2019 dated 22.01.2019. The allegation appears to be that the petitioner has wrongly availed the input tax credit contrary to Section 17(5)(c) of CGST Act, 2017 and therefore, the amount was liable to be recovered under Section 74 of CGST Act, 2017. 3.I have perused the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition and the grounds raised in the writ petition. 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
There is no merit in the challenge to the impugned order in this writ proceeding. If the petitioner is aggrieved, the petitioner has an appellate remedy before the appellate authority under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017. Considering the same, the Writ Petition stands dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to file a statutory appeal before the appellate Commissioner within a period of 30 days from today subject to compliance to the condition of pre- deposit. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. Index : Yes / No 02.04.2024 Internet : Yes / No mm 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.SARAVANAN, J.
mm
2024 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Reproduced from the public record of the Madras High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.