9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 914X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 142(1) of the Jharkhand Goods and Services Taxes, (JGST) Act and also for quashing and setting aside the adjudication orders, both dated 19.10.2020, issued under section 73(9) of the JGST Act and DRC-7, both dated 19.10.2020 (Annexure-4 & 4/1 respectively in both cases). The petitioner has further prayed for a direction to the respondents for unblocking credit ledger which was blocked on 17.02.2020 and on 18.02.2020 to the tune of Rs. 47,38,408/-; however, during pendency of these applications, the credit ledger has been unblocked though the amount has been realized. 4. The case of the petitioner is that that it is engaged in trading of Railway scraps and is duly registered under the provision of GST Act. An inspection was carried out at the business premises of the petitioner at the instance of administrative direction dated 25.06.2019 issued by JCST based on one intelligence note dated 13.06.2019 alleging therein that the petitioner is engaged in availing ineligible credit of input tax under fake invoices by engaging himself in bill trading/circular trading without physical movement of goods. No inspection report, whatsoever, has ever been served upon the petitioner nor the do ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cause notice, adjudication order and summary of order/demand notice in DRC-07. Although a liberty has been given to the Revenue to initiate fresh proceedings by issuing a proper show cause notice and to take a decision thereupon in accordance with law. She further submits that although such liberty has been given to the Respondent department but the fact remains that at the present there is no proceeding against the suppliers of the petitioner meaning thereby; the main cause for initiating proceeding against the petitioner no longer survives as on date. She contended that merely by keeping the present proceedings pending on the ground that the department might initiate a fresh proceeding against the suppliers of the petitioner is not justified. She further submits that the law casts an obligation upon the parties to serve the documents/inspection report which has been relied upon by either of the parties in a proceedings, however in this case no inspection report has ever been served upon the petitioner and/or no opportunity has been given to cross examine witnesses who has supported the inspection report and intelligence note and the same is in violation of Principles of Natural ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the bona fide person. She contended that twice the amount cannot be recovered on the same transaction and if a proceeding has already been initiated against the defaulting dealers and if they are found defaulters, recovery proceedings can be initiated against them and tax along with interests and penalty be recovered from them and the petitioner cannot be charged against the same transactions. 6. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs GST-Investigation Wings, Government of India, referring to GST Council Letter No. F No. 96/GCG-offence case date/GSTC/2019 dated 18.03.2019 issued 'Standard Operating Procedure' (SOP) vide office memorandum dated 12.05.2019. This memorandum was issued to curb the wrong availment/Forward Transaction of Input Tax Credit (hereinafter ITC) by the registered person under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Learned counsel further submits that the State Taxes Department, Government of Jharkhand while scrutinizing the registered persons/dealers as directed by the State Taxes Department HQ, it was detected that many tax payers under GST are though physi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder under Section 73(9) of the JGST Act was passed and issued on 19.10.2020 for financial year 2017-18 & 2018-19 wherein it was categorically indicated that the petitioner had availed the ITC passed by the dealers (M/s. Jai Jawan Kastha Bhandar, M/s. Priti Enterprises) involved in fraudulent passing of ITC. It was found that the ITC so forwarded by the dealers (M/s. Jai Jawan Kastha Bhandar, M/s. Priti Enterpirses) to the petitioner had not actually paid tax to the Government and had shown its tax liability paid to the Government by availing the fraudulent ITC as available in ITC ledger. 7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the documents available on record, it appears that an inspection was carried out at the business premises of the petitioner at the instance of administrative direction dated 25.06.2019 issued by JCST based on one intelligence note dated 13.06.2019 alleging therein that the petitioner is engaged in availing ineligible credit of input tax under fake invoices by engaging himself in bill trading/circular trading without physical movement of goods. Thereafter, the Respondent department also blocked the credit ledger account of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 20 and 3179 of 2020 (M/s. Jai Jawan Kastha Bhandar) for three respective assessments years and W.P.(T) No. 3210 of 2010 and 3211 of 2020 (M/s. Priti Enterprises Vs. The State of Jharkhand and Ors.) for the respective two assessment years and those writ applications were partly allowed by this court and the respective impugned show cause notices, the adjudication orders and the summary of the order/demand notices in DRC-07 in the case of those petitioners were set aside and the matter was remitted back to the concerned authority/adjudicating officer to proceed with the matter in accordance with law vide order dated 21.06.2021. 11. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances when the respondent-Department has duly accepted all the contentions of the petitioner and found the e-way bills and computer generated measurement slip to be correct and genuine documents and the sole reason for initiating the proceedings against this petitioner and passing of the impugned adjudication orders was due to his transaction with M/s Jai Jawan Kastha Bhandar and M/s. Priti Enterprises and when the cases of those assesses have been remanded to the adjudicating authority to pass fresh order in acc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
