Case Law Details
Watermelon Management Service Private Limited Vs Commissioner of Central Tax, GST (Delhi High Court)
The issue under consideration is whether the contention of the petitioner that the provisional attachment for wrong availment of ITC is without jurisdiction and illegal is correct?
In the present case, GST department has conducted search in the registered premises of 8 input suppliers of M/s WMSPL who were suspected of supplying only invoices without actually supply of goods/services. All 8 premises were either found to be non-existent and in case the addresses were found, they were not being used by the registered suppliers of M/s WMSPL. Hence, it is evidence that the above mentioned 8 suppliers were created solely for the purpose of passing on fake ITC. During investigation it was also found that another company by the name of M/s Watermelon HR Services Private Limited (Part of Watermelon group) also appeared to have availed fake ITCfrom the same non-existent suppliers that are suspected to have provided fake ITC to M/s Watermelon Management Services Private Limited. Therefore, their Bank account has been provisionally attached.
High Court states that keeping in view the serious allegations that have been levelled against the petitioner by the officers of DGGI as well as by the Commissioner of CGST, Delhi (East), this Court is of the view that ends of justice would be met if the DGGI is directed to conclude the investigation in the present case within a period of three months. Needless to say, petitioner including its Directors shall cooperate with the respondents in the investigation of the present case. Further, if upon conclusion of investigation DGGI is satisfied with the stand of the petitioner, then it shall close the proceeding and if not, issue an appropriate show cause notice in accordance with law.
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER /JUDGEMENT
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
