9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 444X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Services Tax (GST) registration was cancelled with retrospective effect from 01.07.2017. 2. The impugned order was passed pursuant to the Show Cause Notice dated 26.08.2021 (hereafter the impugned SCN), whereby the petitioner was called upon to show cause why its GST registration not be cancelled. The only reason set out in the impugned SCN for proposing the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration reads as under: - "1 Collects any amount as representing the tax but fails to pay the same to the account of the Central/ State Government beyond a period of three months from the date on which such payment becomes due." 3. The petitioner was called upon to furnish its reply to the impugned SCN within a period of seven working days ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eged collection and non-deposit of the tax or the transaction on which such allegation was premised. Plainly, the impugned SCN is vague and cryptic. 7. In view of the above, the impugned SCN and the impugned order are set aside. 8. The petitioner also prayed that directions be issued to the adjudicating officer to re-adjudicate / reassess the petitioner's liability for the financial years 2017-18 and 2018-19. 9. The petitioner is, essentially, aggrieved by the order dated 26.12.2023 in respect of the tax period from July, 2017 to March, 2018, and the order dated 30.04.2024 in respect of the tax period from April, 2018 to March, 2019 passed under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/ the Delhi Goods and Services Tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he CGST Act/the DGST Act, the petitioner was not entitled to avail the ITC on supplies of goods in respect of which the suppliers had not deposited tax on its outward supplies. 13. We do find from the records that the petitioner has clearly countered the said allegations. The petitioner is unable to establish that the ITC claimed by it in respect of supplies, the tax on such supplies was deposited by its suppliers against their outward supplies to the petitioner. 14. It is rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the respondent that the petitioner has on efficacious remedy of the statutory appeal against the orders dated 26.12.2023 and 30.04.2024. The learned counsel also fairly states that in case the petitioner prefers appeals aga ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
