^®
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 ^New

GST Forms

GST Diary

GST Notebook

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. |

MRISHI MARCNDEY INDIA LTD. vs. SALES TAX OFFICER CLASS II/AVATO & OTHERS
(Delhi High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

SANJEEV SACHDEVA
RAVINDER DUDEJA

Pet. Counsel

Anjali Jha Manish

Priyadarshi Manish

Divya Rastogi

Res. Counsel

---

Petitioner / Applicant	MRISHI MARCNDEY INDIA LTD.
Respondent	SALES TAX OFFICER CLASS II/AVATO & OTHERS
Court	Delhi High Court
State	Delhi
Date	May 7, 2024
Order No.	W. P. (C) 6467/2024 & CM APPL. 26953/2024
Citation	2024(5) TAXREPLY 9709
Add to Favorites	Add to favorites.
Download Original Order
Print (Full Page)
Print (Judgement Only)

Related Tags :

☍

Section 73

TaxGPT ^Beta

Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

Listen this case in simple words

Audio Timeline

Audio Speed:

AA |

ORDER
JUDGMENT SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL) 1. Petitioner impugns order dated 21.12.2023, whereby the impugned show cause notice dated 26.09.2023 proposing a demand of Rs. 46,41,15,492/- against the petitioner has been disposed of and demand including penalty has been raised against the petitioner. The order has been passed under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 [hereinafter referred to as, “the Act”]. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in response to Show Cause Notice dated 26.09.2023, petitioner on 25.10.2023, requested for some time to file a reply. In the response dated 25.10.2023, petitioner contended that it had concrete evidence to support that there was no excess claim of Input Tax Credit, and sought time on the ground that the Authorized Representative of the petitioner who was handling the accounts was not available during the said period. 3. Leaned counsel submits that there is sufficient material available wi....