This court dispose of the present petition with the observation that the petitioner shall approach the competent officer putting forth his claim of being owner of the seized good by a moving proper application along with the copy of this order.

The grievance of the petitioner is that while issuing the show-cause notice for cancellation of GST registration, simultaneously order of suspension of registration was also passed without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and/or without assigning any reason thereof. Only ground put forth in the show-cause notice was that the petitioner-taxpayer claimed excess ITC during the year 2019-2020 and also claimed ineligible ITC. This Court directs the respondent to consider the explanation submitted to the show-cause notice.

In the absence of breach of fundamental rights; violation of principles of natural justice; excess of jurisdiction; or a challenge to the vires of the statute or delegated legislation, the writ petition would not be maintainable.

Petitioner prayed to direct the respondents to revoke cancellation of `GST` registration of the writ petitioner. Since time limit to file statutory appeal is already elapsed, it is open to writ petitioner to apply for GST registration afresh instead of revocation.

The petitioner seeks to challenge the CBI Circular No.163/19/2021-GST dated 06.10.2021 to the extent that it erroneously deals with and determines the issue of taxability of Dried Distillers Grains Solubles and Distillers Wet Grains Solubles. This matter is adjourned.

Let the applicant be released on bail

Advisory for Pilot Project of Biometric-Based Aadhaar Authentication and Document Verification for GST Registration Applicants of Andhra Pradesh

Advisory: Two-factor Authentication for Taxpayers

This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenges an order whereby the petitioner’s bank account has been provisionally attached under the provisions of Section 83 of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017. The case of the petitioner is that the impugned provisional attachment is bad and illegal, as Section 83 would not confer any power on the authority to have successive attachments, as in the present case, initially an order dated 18 March, 2021 was issued provisionally attaching the bank account of the petitioner; thereafter, again on 25 March, 2022, an order of provisional attachment of the petitioner’s bank account was issued and now the impugned attachment order dated 17 March, 2023 has been issued. This court propose to dispose of this petition by continuing the ad-interim order.

The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying that directions be issued to the respondents to refund the amount

The petitioner before this Court, who was registered under the GST Act was issued a show cause notice for cancellation of registration on 27th November, 2020. This Court finds that by ex parte order the first appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed as he has failed to appear before the authority. This Court directs the Appellate Authority to reconsider the appeal of the petitioner on merits after hearing the counsel for the petitioner.

The Assistant Commissioner had wrongly detained the truck along with the goods of the petitioner and imposed a penalty of Rs.9,70,542/- and the adjudication order and the appellate order have no legs to stand as no reasoning has been accorded by either of the authorities in consonance with the law so as to hold that the old and damaged batteries are to be sold according to the weight and not per piece.