Case Law Details
R. J. Exim And Another Vs Principal Commissioner Central Goods And Service Tax (Allahabad High Court)
From the perusal of Section 74(5) of the Act, it is evident that a person chargeable with tax may, before service of notice under sub-section (1), pay the amount of tax and interest under Section 50 and penalty @ 15% of such tax on the basis of own ascertainment of such tax or the tax as ascertained by the proper officer and inform the proper officer in writing of such payment. The intimation dated 22.07.2020 issued by the proper officer to the petitioners is referable to Section 74(5) of the Act and Rule 142(1A) of the Rules. The proper officer afforded opportunity to the petitioners to file an objection, but the petitioners have not filed any objection.
11. The impugned Provisional attachment order has been issued by the competent authority under Section 83 of the Act for the purpose of protecting interest of the Government revenue. Against the order of Provisional attachment under Section 83(1) of the Act, the petitioners have an opportunity to file an objection under sub-Rule 5 of Rule 159 of the Rules. It has been admitted before us by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have not filed any objection against the impugned provisional attachment dated 22.07.2020. Therefore, the impugned orders cannot be said to suffer from any manifest error of law.
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER /JUDGEMENT
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri B.K.Singh. Raghuvanshi, learned counsel for the respondents.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
