Case Law Details
Saha Hospitality Ltd. Vs The State of Maharashtra & Ors. (Bombay High Court)
1. The Petitioner has filed the above Writ Petition challenging the orders dated 17th February, 2020 and 19th June, 2020 issued by Respondent No.2 – The Deputy Commissioner of State Tax, D.C. E-634, T.U.-3 (impugned orders).
2. According to the Petitioner, by the impugned orders, Respondent No. 2 seeks to directly recover interest under Section 50 of the GST Act through coercive recovery provisions of Section 79. This is clearly in contravention of Section 78 of the GST Act, which provides for a three-month breathing period after the passing of any order, before the coercive recovery provisions of Section 79 can be invoked.
3. It is further submitted by the Petitioner that the impugned orders are passed without issuing any show cause notice and without giving a hearing to the Petitioner. The Petitioner is not aware of how the interest calculation has been arrived at.
4. The Petitioner has also submitted that Respondent No.2 is threatening to initiate coercive recovery proceedings under Section 79 of the GST Act if the amount is not paid within a period of 7 days. The Respondent No.2 has filed its Affidavit in Reply dated 27th July, 2020. Paragraph 18 of which reads thus :
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
