Reply to Show Cause Notice for Non-Registration under GST by Goods Transport Agency

Draft Response to Department`s Query Regarding GST on Discount Received

Draft Appeal against order of Detention of goods as e-invoice was not accompanied with goods in transit

Draft Reply Rejection of Refund Application on the basis of Non-Compliance with Rule 10B of the CGST Act, 2017 - Request for Reconsideration

The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying that the raid conducted on 16.11.2023 be declared as illegal and in gross violation of the due process of law. The petitioner also impugns the Show Cause Notice dated 25.07.2024 (hereafter the impugned SCN) issued under Section 74(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereafter the CGST Act) and the State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereafter the SGST Act).

1. Challenging, inter alia, an order dated 25th January, 2024 passed under Section 73 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) for the tax period April 2021 to March 2022, the present writ petition has been filed.

The petitioner challenged the order passed against his deceased wife, the proprietor of M/s. S.R. Steels, requesting that the impugned order be set aside and that he, as the legal heir, be allowed to present his case. The court set aside the impugned order, remanding the matter for fresh consideration, subject to the payment of 10% of the disputed tax, and directed the respondent to lift the bank account attachment.

The petitioner has filed the present petition, impugning an order whereby the petitioner’s GST registration was cancelled with retrospective effect from 03.07.2017. In the present case, the impugned SCN does not set out any specific reason which was capable of eliciting a meaningful response. In absence of any particulars as to the alleged fraud, willful misstatement, or facts allegedly suppressed, the petitioner cannot be expected to respond to the same.

The petitioner challenged the issuance of a penalty notice for delayed issuance under Section 129 of the Odisha GST Act, 2017, arguing it was issued beyond the stipulated seven days after seizure. The court rejected the argument, ruling that the notice was served on the seventh day, in compliance with the Act. The petitioner also claimed improper service on the driver rather than the owner, which the court also dismissed.

The petitioner challenged the dismissal of its appeal due to procedural errors and delay in filing. The court set aside the impugned order, ruling that the dismissal was based on minor procedural issues that could have been rectified if the petitioner had been given an opportunity. The court remanded the case to the appellate authority for de novo consideration and clarified that pre-deposits made via Form DRC-03 are valid for appeals filed before the relevant circular.

This Court has not gone into the merits of the writ petition and the petitioner shall be at liberty to urge whatever points he wishes to urge before the respondent on the issue.

The petitioner, a public limited company engaged in financing through loans secured by gold, sought a refund of unutilized credit on account of Service Tax, Education Cess, SHEC, and KKC. The court, relying on prior judgments, held that such Cess could not be transitioned under the CGST Act and dismissed the petition. The petitioner’s claim for refund was also rejected, being time-barred and outside the scope of Section 54 of the CGST Act.