^®
TaxReply India Private Limited

GST Library

Best GST Library

Subscription Plans

TaxGPT

GST News | Updates

GST Calendar

GST Case Laws

GST Case Laws Sitemap

GST Notifications, Circulars, Releases etc.

Act & Rules

Act & Rules (Multi-view)

GST Rates

HSN Codes

GST Forms

My Favourites ^New

GST Diary

GST Notebook

GST Staff Manager ^New

GST Fees Manager

GST Council Meetings

GST Set-off Calculator

ITC Reversal Calculator

E-invoice Calculator

Inverted Duty Calculator

GSTR-3B Manual

GSTR-9 Manual

GSTR-9C Manual

Full Site Search

E-way Bill

Finance Bill

GST e-books

TaxReply Support

YouTube Videos

Twitter

Buy Premium Tax Domains

About Us

Our Services

🔒

TaxReply India Pvt Ltd

🔒

^®

Subscribe Free GST updates on...

Subscribe to Best GST Library of India and get ahead of the rest. Click here for plans. | GST Act & Rules e-book Click here. |

JBR CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED vs. UNION OF INDIA
(Andhra Pradesh High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

DURGA PRASAD RAO
VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA

Pet. Counsel

P.a. Seshu

Res. Counsel

B.v.s. Chalapathi Rao

Petitioner / Applicant	JBR CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED
Respondent	UNION OF INDIA
Court	Andhra Pradesh High Court
State	Andhra Pradesh
Date	Aug 7, 2023
Order No.	W.P.NO.11546 OF 2023
Citation	2023(8) TAXREPLY 8596
Original Order
My Favorites	Add to Fav ☆ Add to favorites.

TaxGPT ^Beta

Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

Listen this case in simple words

Audio Timeline

Audio Speed:

AA |

ORDER
ORDER (PER SMT. JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA) Petitioner seeks Writ of Mandamus to declare the Order passed by the respondent No. 4 dated 19.10.2022 as unconstitutional without jurisdiction, arbitrary and consequently, to condone delay of 65 days in preferring the appeal before the respondent No. 3 under Section 107 of the C.G.S.T Act, 2017. 2. Heard Sri P.A. Seshu, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri B.V.S. Chalapathi Rao, learned Senior Standing Counsel for C.B.I.C for the respondents. 3. Petitioner is a private limited company, essentially engaged in providing Works Contract Service. Letters were issued by the revenue requesting the petitioner to explain the reasons for the discrepancies noted relating to the payment of the GST for the period from July, 2017 to March, 2020. In response, petitioner explained the detailed reasons for the mismatch. Respondent No. 4 issued a show cause notice proposing demand of tax to a tune of Rs. 1,33,19,137/- along w....