Grounds of Writ-The Petitioner, aggrieved by the impugned order and the subsequent rejection of their appeal by the First Appellate Authority, has filed a Writ Petition. They argue that the Respondents failed to consider their reply to ASMT-10 and other impugned SCNs, which clarified the discrepancy in tax liability between GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B. The difference, they claim, arose due to a data entry error, where the liability was recorded both as an advance receipt and under the tax invoice section of GSTR-1. The Petitioner asserts that this mistake was rectified while filing GSTR-9.Additionally, they argue that DRC-01A was never issued, and the impugned order was passed without properly establishing a shortfall in tax payment.
Order-The Court has quashed and set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter back to the Respondent for reconsideration. The Court has observed that the Petitioner's reply was not taken into account and that DRC-01A was not issued, thereby denying the Petitioner the opportunity to be heard. The Court has directed the Respondents to pass a fresh de novo order within 12 weeks, ensuring that the Petitioner is given a fair hearing.
GST Case Law- ShreeJi Developers Versus State of Gujarat
Citation-2025 TAXONATION 412 (GUJARAT)
Authors for the blog-Bhogavalli Mallikarjuna Gupta & Siddharth Surana
SUBSCRIBE GST E-LIBRARY (INDIA'S HIGHEST GST CASE LAW DATA)
FOR MORE UPDATE ON GST/ IT JOIN OUR FREE WHATSAPP GROUP BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK https://chat.whatsapp.com/C8VB6F6VHme3A061UDQKhj
