1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State.

A typographical error in the e-way bill without any further material to substantiate the intention to evade tax should not and cannot lead to imposition of penalty. In the present case, instead of ‘0401’, ‘2224’ was incorrectly entered into the e-way bill which clearly appears to be a typographical error. This court is of the view that imposition of penalty under Section 129 of the Act is without jurisdiction and illegal in law

Petitioner impugns order whereby the impugned Show Cause Notice proposing a demand against the petitioner has been disposed and a demand of Rs. 3,09,18,988.00 including penalty has been raised against the petitioner. If the Proper Officer was of the view that reply was not satisfactory and further details were required, the same could have been specifically sought from the petitioner. However, the record does not reflect that any such opportunity was given to the petitioner to clarify its reply or furnish further documents/details. In view of the above, the order cannot be sustained, and the matter is liable to be remitted to the Proper Officer for re-adjudication.

1. Petitioner impugns order dated 13.02.2021, whereby the GST registration of the petitioner has been cancelled retrospectively with effect from 15.07.2017. Petitioner also impugns Show Cause Notice dated 03.02.2021.

1. Heard Sri Anand Dubey, learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondent Nos.1, 2, 4, 5 and Sri Dipak Seth, Advocate, who has filed his Power today on behalf of respondent No.3, which is taken on record. His name shall be shown in the cause list as appearing for respondent no.3 when the case is next listed.

1. Petitioner impugns order dated 29.02.2024 whereby the GST registration of the petitioner was cancelled retrospectively with effect from 05.05.2018. Petitioner also impugns Show Cause Notice dated 05.01.2024.

1. Petitioner impugns order dated 15.12.2022, whereby the GST registration of the petitioner has been cancelled retrospectively with effect from 01.07.2017. Petitioner also impugns Show Cause Notice dated 02.12.2021.

These writ petitions are directed against assessment orders dated 23.08.2023 in respect of distinct assessment periods. The petitioner is a civil contractor and a registered person under applicable GST enactments. Pursuant to a show cause notice, the petitioner requested for a month`s time to file a reply. The petitioner also requested for a personal hearing. The impugned assessment orders were issued in the above facts and circumstances by recording that the petitioner neither filed objections nor attended the personal hearing.

An assessment order dated 11.07.2023 is assailed both on grounds of breach of principles of natural justice and on the ground that applicable circulars with regard to the procedure to be followed in cases of discrepancy between the GSTR-3B returns and the auto populated GSTR-2A returns were not adhered to.

An assessment order dated 29.12.2023 is the subject of challenge in this writ petition.

Mr. Raghvendra Shukla, Senior Panel Counsel for UOI. Mr. Anurag Ojha, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Subham Kumar and Mr. Vipul Kumar, Advocates for the Respondent.

1. Petitioner impugns order dated 29.12.2023, whereby the impugned Show Cause Notice dated 26.09.2023, proposing a demand against the petitioner has been disposed of and a demand of Rs. 4,70,512.00 including penalty has been raised against the petitioner. The order has been passed under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to the Act).