Case Law Details
Suvarna Fibrotech Pvt. Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC) (Madras High Court)
Madras High Court held that section 125 is a residuary provision and as there are three specific non-compliances qua statutory requirements, penalty u/s. 125 of Rs. 25,000 each can be invoked for such non-compliances.
Facts- The writ petitioner is in the business of manufacturing Fibre glass composite moulded products. The place of business was inspected by Enforcement Wing Officials. During the course of inspection, certain defects were noticed and an inspection report was made and that this pertains to ‘Financial Year 2019-20’.
It was noticed defects under three heads i.e. (a)alleged sales suppression; (b) contravention of statutory provisions and (c) GSTR-1 filed up to 2019 but GSTR 3B not filed, tax collected but not paid to the Government.
Conclusion- This writ Court deems it appropriate to leave it at that and say that interference is refused but it is made clear that it cannot be put against the writ petitioner that there is ‘suppression of facts to evade tax’ within the meaning of Section 74(1) and it is only a case of tax not being paid within the meaning of Section 73(1).
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
