There is no merits in the submission of the counsel of the petitioner that the petitioner has not been issued with the hearing notice. This court is inclined to dismiss this writ petition.
Section 73, 74 of the CGST Act, 2017 –– Demand cum Notice –––The petitioner challenged the impugned notice dated 24.12.2019 in Form GST DRC – 07, on the ground that the same has been passed without uploading the order as is required under the provisions of the Act. The counsel for the respondent submitted that the petitioner has been served with the order dated 18.12.2019, which has been passed after considering the above aspects. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the copy of the order dated 18.12.2019 makes it clear that the petitioner has not replied to the notice when indeed one of the reply dated 27.05.2019 has been duly acknowledged by the respondent. The court observed that there is no merit in the submission of the petitioner. Be that as it may, the petitioner has an alternate remedy before the Appellate Commissioner under Section 107 .
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court granted the petitioner to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority within a period of thirty days. In case, that such appeal is filed by the petitioner, the Appellate Commissioner shall pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law preferably within a period of three months.
There is no merits in the submission of the counsel of the petitioner that the petitioner has not been issued with the hearing notice. This court is inclined to dismiss this writ petition.
Section 73, 74 of the CGST Act, 2017 –– Demand cum Notice –––The petitioner challenged the impugned notice dated 24.12.2019 in Form GST DRC – 07, on the ground that the same has been passed without uploading the order as is required under the provisions of the Act. The counsel for the respondent submitted that the petitioner has been served with the order dated 18.12.2019, which has been passed after considering the above aspects. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the copy of the order dated 18.12.2019 makes it clear that the petitioner has not replied to the notice when indeed one of the reply dated 27.05.2019 has been duly acknowledged by the respondent. The court observed that there is no merit in the submission of the petitioner. Be that as it may, the petitioner has an alternate remedy before the Appellate Commissioner under Section 107 .
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court granted the petitioner to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority within a period of thirty days. In case, that such appeal is filed by the petitioner, the Appellate Commissioner shall pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law preferably within a period of three months.