9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 965X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... For the Respondents: Mr. Rajeev Aggarwal, Additional Standing Counsel with Ms. Samridh Vats, Advocates. JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL) 1. Petitioner impugns order dated 29.11.2023, whereby the impugned Show Cause Notice dated 24.09.2023, proposing a demand against the petitioner has been disposed and a demand of Rs. 1,52,60,614.00 including penalty has been raised against the petitione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , and despite submitting a detailed reply dated 20.10.2023, Petitioner was served with two notices dated 07.11.2023 and 14.11.2023 seeking a reply of the Petitioner and to appear for personal hearing. Thereafter, impugned order dated 29.11.2023 was passed without taking into consideration the reply submitted by the petitioner and is a cryptic order. 5. He further submits that on account of an err ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d any reply nor appeared in person or through any authorized representative on the stipulated date and time. And whereas, taxpayer has been accorded one more opportunity u/s 75(4) of the CGST/DGST Act 2017 and the taxpayer again failed to reply and appear in person himself/herself or through any authorized representative on the stipulated date and time. And whereas, after analyzing, examining and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reply submitted by the Petitioner on merits and then form an opinion. He merely held that the no reply has been filed which ex-facie shows that Proper Officer has not applied his mind to the reply submitted by the petitioner. 9. 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 d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
