TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 766X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioner had defaulted in submitting the GST returns for the aforesaid two financial years - HELD THAT:- We are not very much impressed with the said submission of the petitioner by linking up a refund being entitled to them under some other provisions of law and the requirement of law to submit their tax returns. We are also of the view that the same stand of the petitioner cannot bestow a legal right upon them not to pay the required GST under the law or not to submit their returns for two given financial years. But at the same time, if the petitioner is of the view that as because an amount of ₹ 14,42,51,265/- had not been refunded to them and the requirement of tax to be paid by them is a small amount compared to the refund th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... For the Respondent : Mr. S C Keyal (SC, GST) ORDER Heard Dr. A Saraf, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr. SC Keyal, learned standing counsel for the GST Department. 2. The petitioner is an assessee under the GST bearing registration No.18AABCB5691A2ZV. The respondents in the GST by an email dated 08.10.2020 had provided that the E-Way Bill (EWB) generation facility of the petitioner would be blocked on the EWB Portal in the event the petitioner fails to file their GSTR 3B returns for two financial years being 2018-19 and 201-20. The e-mail provides that the blockage of the EWB generation facility would be in terms of Rule 138 E (b) of the CGST Rules, 2017. The relevant portion of the e-mail is extracted as belo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te of being entitled to the aforesaid refund, same has not been done by the respondent authorities. Accordingly, the petitioner takes a stand that as because the amount of ₹ 14,42,51,265/- has not been refunded to the petitioner, therefore, the petitioner had defaulted in submitting the GST returns for the aforesaid two financial years. 4. We are not very much impressed with the said submission of the petitioner by linking up a refund being entitled to them under some other provisions of law and the requirement of law to submit their tax returns. We are also of the view that the same stand of the petitioner cannot bestow a legal right upon them not to pay the required GST under the law or not to submit their returns for two given f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
