M/S. Aditya Craft And Papers PVT. LTD., Cuttack vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs (CBIC), Deptt. Of Revenue, Minitry Of Finance New Delhi
Held
The High Court granted an extension of time for the petitioner to file a reply to the SCN. The authority is to proceed in accordance with law upon receipt of the reply, failing which the SCN will be treated as not replied to.
Facts
The petitioner received a demand-cum-show cause notice (SCN) issued under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017, based on an audit report. The petitioner argued that the matter was for reconciliation and they have since filed GSTR-9C, denying any fraud or wilful misstatement.
Key Issues
Whether the SCN issued under Section 74 was premature or warranted given the petitioner's subsequent reconciliation efforts. The issue of the petitioner's right to reply to the SCN was also addressed.
Sections Cited
Section 74
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
2024
Mr. Parida, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, impugned is demand-cum-show cause notice (SCN) dat
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.