9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 1075X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Appellant: Mr. Rajiv Agnihotri, Advocate. For the Respondent: Ms. Mamta Singla Talwar, DAG, Haryana. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J. (ORAL) 1. The petitioner has assailed the blocking of its account and blocking of Input Tax Credit for an amount of Rs. 32,70,384/-. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already filed reply to the notice under Section 74 of the Centr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the notice under Section 74 of the Act. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has reiterated that the petitioner should be allowed to operate its account as its business should not be stopped merely because the matter is pending with the respondents relating to the allegations. 5. We have carefully considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and find that the responden ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re being fake income tax credit claims claimed by the petitioner. It is the prima facie view which is required to be taken up by the respondents before taking action under Section 86-A of the Act and at that stage, in our opinion, there is no occasion for issuing any show cause notice or for affording of any opportunity of being heard as the said aspect is to be only dealt at the stage show cause ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 30.05.2023, this Court had prevented the respondents from passing the final order. 9. In view of what we have observed hereinabove, we now direct the respondents to pass the final order expeditiously, preferably within one month from today, and so far as the petitioner is concerned, it should be allowed to operate its account as by now, more than one and a half year have elapsed since the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
