Skip to main content

Home » Laws » GST Case Laws » M/s SRI RADHA KRISHNA INTERNATIONAL v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

M/s SRI RADHA KRISHNA INTERNATIONAL v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

High Court, Delhi
Sanjeev Sachdeva, Justice & Ravinder Dudeja, Justice

M/s SRI RADHA KRISHNA INTERNATIONAL
v.
UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

W.P.(C) 3227/2024 & CM. APPLS. 13278-79/2024 dated 04.03.2024

Law : GST
Act Name : Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017
Relevant Section : Section 73
Decision : Matter remanded back

Demand & penalty – The petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 27.12.2023, which disposed SCN dated 25.09.2023, by which demand has been raised against the petitioner amounting to Rs. 22,10,220/-, including penalty, u/s 73 of the CGST Act, 2017. – Learned counsel for Petitioner submitted that despite submitting a detailed reply to the Show Cause Notice, department failed to consider their response & passed the impugned order dated 27.12.2023. – While Learned counsel for respondent submits that the demand was created on account of claim of Input Tax Credit from a dealer whose registration had been cancelled and no details were furnished by the petitioner – Held- The court after looking into the merits of the case, observed that the impugned order, records that the reply uploaded by the tax payer is not satisfactory, however, if the Proper Officer was of the view that reply was not satisfactory and further details were required, the same could have been specifically sought from the petitioner. Proper officer had to at least consider the reply on merits and then form an opinion whether the reply was not satisfactory. He merely held that the reply is not satisfactory which ex facie shows that Proper Officer has not applied his mind to the reply submitted by the petitioner. In view of the above, the order cannot be sustained, and the matter is liable to be remitted to the Proper Officer for re-adjudication. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 27.12.2023 is set aside and matter is remitted to the Proper Officer for re-adjudication.

Represented By:

Counsel for the Petitioner: Pranay Jain & Karan Singh, Advocates.

Continue Reading...
This is only a preview of the article. The complete article contains detailed analysis, examples, notifications, circulars, case laws, interpretations and practical guidance available to premium members.

🔒 Premium Content

Subscribe to access complete articles, notifications, circulars, case laws, downloads, videos and premium resources.

Become Premium Member