Narayan Sahu vs. Union Of INDIA
Held
The Court held that the cross-authorization provision under Section 4 of the IGST Act, read with the State notifications, sufficiently empowered State Tax officers to act as proper officers. The Court also found no reason to interfere with the revenue's prerogative regarding the deemed owner of goods.
Facts
The petitioner challenged a demand notice for tax and penalty, arguing the issuing authority lacked jurisdiction. The petitioner contended that cross-authorization provisions under the IGST Act were vague and lacked necessary notifications to delineate jurisdictions.
Key Issues
Whether State Tax officers were properly authorized to issue demand notices under the IGST Act, and whether the petitioner qualified as the deemed owner of goods for the purpose of Section 129.
Sections Cited
Section 4, Section 129
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
J U D G M E N T
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date of hearing and judgment : 26th November, 2024 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ARINDAM SINHA, J.
Mr. Gupta, learned advocate virtually appears on behalf of petitioner. He submits, impugned is order dated 26th September, 2024 said to be demand of tax and penalty, by which total of almost ₹41,00,000/- (forty one lakhs) has been demanded. The notice stood
WP(C) no. 28012 of 2024
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Orissa High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.