9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (5) TMI 300X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tes. For the Respondents Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh, SSC with Ms. Suhani Mathur and Mr. Jai Ahuja, Advocates. PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J. (ORAL) 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. CM APPL.24763/2025 (Exemption) 2. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 3. The application is disposed of. W.P.(C) 5438/2025 and CMAPPL No. 24762/2025 4. The present petition has been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... existing firm. However, he concedes to the fact that there can be no doubt that the blocking is for a period of one year. 8. The relevant Rule 86 (A) (3) is set out herein below: "1 [Rule 86A : Conditions of use of amount available in electronic credit ledger xxxxxx (3) Such restriction shall cease to have effect after the expiry of a period of one year from the date of imposing such rest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 24,05,827/- [Rs. 9,49,204 as CGST and Rs. 14,56,623/- as SGST]. As a result, the ITC available in the electronic credit ledger of the petitioner is in negative i.e. Rs. 3,67,17,895/- [Rs. -1,86,12,657/- as CGST and Rs. - 1,86,12,657/- as SGST]. The said action by the respondent no. 2 is against the law laid down by this Hon'ble Court in the case of Best Crop Science Pvt. Ltd. Vs Pr. Commissioner, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the learned Additional Commissioner, Central Tax, Delhi is enclosed herewith as Annexure P-3." 10. Further, ld. Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is in the course of filing an appeal challenging the Order-in-Original dated 12th February, 2025. 11. In any event it is his submission that the credit ledger cannot be blocked beyond the period of one year, as stipulated un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
