TMI Blog2024 (4) TMI 658X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ersonal hearing notice was issued. On examining the impugned order with regard to turnover discrepancy as between the different returns, it is noticeable that the petitioner explained the difference in its reply dated 28.07.2023 by pointing out that the lower amount was inadvertently reported in the GSTR 1 statement, which was subsequently rectified by filing the annual return. This aspect has not been noticed in the impugned order. Thus, the impugned order dated 28.12.2023 is set aside and the matter is remanded for reconsideration. The petitioner is permitted to submit additional documents in support of its reply within 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Upon receipt thereof, the respondent is directed to provide a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,61,74,392/- was reported. He also pointed out that the tax liability arising upon such reconciliation was remitted under DRC-03. By turning to the tax demand in respect of exempted supply value, learned counsel pointed out that the petitioner submitted sample copies of statement of accounts to establish that the sum of Rs. 43,68,93,176/- was interest income which is exempted under applicable GST enactments. By further submitting that the total documentation is extremely voluminous, learned counsel submits that the petitioner would endeavor to produce such documents, if necessary. In any event, he submits that these values are duly reflected in the petitioner's financial statement and can be verified. Learned counsel also points out tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the following finding was recorded: J.3 The taxpayer has given in the reply that having given the turnover as per GSTR-1, GSTR-3B and GSTR-9, there is no discrepancy in turnover on comparison with different returns. On the other hand, tax payer has failed to reconcile the difference as called for in the notice, that is to say, difference arising out of turnover as per their summary against turnover as per GSTR-1, GSTR-3B and GSTR-9C. Likewise, as regards the petitioner's claim that turnover of Rs. 43,68,93,176/- is exempt, the impugned order records that only sample copies of statement of account was provided. The operative portion of the impugned order is as under: B.3 I observed that the tax payer has given only sample copies of sta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
