9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (10) TMI 465X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itioner : Mr. Shankar Lal Agarwal, Advocate For the State : Mr. Piyush Chitresh, A.C to A.G For the Respondent : Mr. Bharat Kumar, Advocate ORDER Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Shankar Lal Agarwal, Mr. Piyush Chitresh, A.C to leaned Advocate General for the State of Jharkhand and Mr. Bharat Kumar, learned counsel for respondent no. 3- Bharti Airtel Limited through Video Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng a meeting with the respondent no. 3. State has filed a counter affidavit. Learned counsel for the State submits that the writ petition is premature as the adjudication on the impugned notice is yet to be made. Petitioner was asked to explain the discrepancies found in the return. But instead of appearing before the authority, he has approached this Court. Learned counsel for the State submits ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ew GST registration number of the petitioner was not provided with the answering respondent in the month of July, 2017, the returns under Section 39 of GST Act were deposited in the Console B2C Project. They were uploaded in September, 2018, but with a prefix due to the issue of duplicity of invoices as per provisions of Section 39 of the GST Act. This issue has arisen only because of the fact tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... led by the petitioner. Petitioner and respondent no. 3 both are ready and bound to cooperate in the inquiry. Respondent no. 2 shall endeavour to conclude the inquiry within a reasonable time preferably 16 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Petitioner and respondent no. 3 both should cooperate in the matter.
Accordingly, the instant petition stands disposed of. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
