The record does not reflect that any opportunity was given to the Petitioner to clarify its reply or furnish further documents/details as required by the proper officer and therefore, the order cannot be sustained; the matter is liable to be remitted to the Proper Officer for re-adjudication after giving an opportunity of personal hearing who shall pass a fresh speaking order in accordance with law.

Petitioner impugns order whereby the impugned Show Cause Notice proposing a demand against the Petitioner has been disposed of and a demand including penalty has been raised against the Petitioner. Proper Officer had to at least consider the reply on merits and then form an opinion whether the reply was incomplete. He merely held that the reply is incomplete and lacks supporting documents which ex-facie shows that Proper Officer has not applied his mind to the reply submitted by the petitioner. 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. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside. The matter is remitted to the Proper Officer for re-adjudication.

Petitioner impugns order whereby the GST registration of the petitioner has been cancelled retrospectively with effect from 15.11.2018. Merely, because a taxpayer has not filed the returns for some period does not mean that the taxpayer’s registration is required to be cancelled with retrospective date also covering the period when the returns were filed and the taxpayer was compliant. In view of the fact that the Petitioner does not seek to carry on business or continue the registration, the impugned order dated 25.08.2023 is modified to the limited extent that registration shall now be treated as cancelled with effect from 08.11.2022 i.e., the date when the Show Cause Notice was issued.

By means of the present writ petition the petitioner has assailed the order by which the registration of the petitioner has been cancelled. From the perusal of the order it transpires that no reason has been assigned for cancellation of the registration of the petitioner. In view of the above, the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner, is hereby quashed

This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the writ petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed in appeal wherein the penalty imposed on the petitioner under Section 129(3) of the U.P. GST Act has been affirmed. unloading of goods at a different place by itself would not lead to imposition of penalty. The impugned order is quashed and set aside. The writ petition is allowed

J.J. Distributors, Rep. By Its Managing Partner, Vinod Nahar Vs The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Chenn

The petitioner is a registered person under applicable GST enactments and operates on Pan-India basis. Pursuant to an audit and the issuance of an audit report dated 24.09.2023, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 29.09.2023. The petitioner replied thereto on 27.10.2023. The order impugned herein was issued thereafter on 31.12.2023.

MSME Draft Agreement Copy (Short)

1. Heard Sri Aditya Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Ankur Agarwal, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

The applicant has no previous criminal antecedents and as the complaint has already been submitted, there is no chances of tampering with the evidences and further that the applicant is in jail since 05.11.2023, this court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case without commenting on the merits of the case.

An order in original dated 21.12.2023 in relation to assessment period 2017-18 is challenged by the petitioner. The petitioner received a show cause notice dated 25.09.2023. Such show cause notice was replied to on 19.10.2023. Eventually, the impugned order was issued on 21.12.2023.

By these two writ petitions, garnishee orders issued to the petitioner`s bank are assailed. Assessment orders were issued against the petitioner in respect of both the assessment periods covered by these writ petitions in December 2022. These orders were carried in appeal before the appellate authority. By orders dated 29.09.2023 & 31.10.2023, respectively, the appeals were rejected. As a condition for filing the appeals, 10% of the disputed tax demand under each assessment order was remitted. On the ground that the garnishee orders impugned herein were issued in spite of the petitioner informing the tax authorities that appeals would be filed as soon as the Appellate Tribunal is constituted, the present writ petitions were filed.