Sanjay Paliya Contractor Vs State of Madhya Pradesh and Others (Madhya Pradesh High Court)
The Madhya Pradesh High Court disposed of a batch of writ petitions through a common order, as identical questions of fact and law were involved. For the purpose of adjudication, the Court considered the facts of Writ Petition No. 18150 of 2023.
The petitioner, a proprietorship firm engaged in the business of construction and registered under the GST regime, challenged the order-in-original dated 28.07.2022 passed in relation to the financial year 2020-21. Following scrutiny of the petitioner’s returns, the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Itarsi Circle, noticed certain discrepancies and issued GST ASMT-10 dated 20.04.2022, requiring the petitioner to explain why tax amounting to ₹5,75,712 along with interest and penalty should not be recovered.
According to the petitioner, a summary of GSTR-2 (Auto-draft) was submitted before the Assistant Commissioner. However, no detailed explanation regarding the discrepancies was furnished. Subsequently, a show cause notice dated 07.06.2022 was issued under Section 73 of the GST Act alleging wrongful availment and utilisation of input tax credit. The petitioner was directed to submit a reply by 06.07.2022. It was undisputed that the petitioner did not file any reply to the show cause notice. Consequently, the Assistant Commissioner passed a final order confirming tax, interest and penalty amounting to ₹5,57,469.
