M/S Aditya Craft And Papers Private Limited,Cuttack vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs,New Delhi
Held
The Court extended the time for the petitioner to file a reply to the SCN. The authority is to proceed according to law upon receipt of the reply, failing which the SCN will be treated as unreplied.
Facts
The petitioner received a demand-cum-show cause notice (SCN) under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017, based on an audit report. The petitioner argued that the matter was for reconciliation and they had since filed GSTR-9C, denying any fraud or wilful misstatement.
Key Issues
Whether the SCN issued under Section 74 was premature given the petitioner's subsequent reconciliation filing, and whether the petitioner should be granted more time to respond.
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) dated 2nd Augu
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.