Case Law Details
V.L.S. Fibre Vs Assistant Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (Madras High Court)
Heard Ms.S.Sarojini, learned counsel for Mr.R.Anish Kumar, learned counsel on record for the petitioner and Mr.A.P.Srinivas, learned Senior Standing Counsel for R1 and R2.
2. The challenge is to a notice of demand of interest under Section 50 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (in short ‘CGST Act’) for various months between July, 2017 and October, 2019. No reply has been filed by the petitioner to this notice.
3. However, according to the petitioner, the computation of the demand is itself incorrect and liable to be revoked. Thus, it is appropriate that the petitioner file a reply to notice dated 04.02.2020, setting out the proper interest payable, according to it.
4. Let the amount be re-determined by the authority in light of the decision of this Court in the case of M/s. Maansarovar Motors Private Limited, Represented by its Director, No.292/294, S.F.No.290/2, 291, Mount Poonamallee High Road, Ayyappanthangal, Chennai-600056 v. The Assistant Commissioner, Poonamallee Division, Chennai Outer Commissionerate, C-48, TNHB Building, Anna Nagar, Chennai-600 040 and others [2021 (44) GSTL 126], within a period of four (4) weeks from today, after hearing the petitioner.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
