Case Details: Amarnath Trading Co. v. State of U.P. - [2024] 158 taxmann.com 383 (Allahabad)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Saumitra Dayal Singh & Manjive Shukla, JJ
- Praveen Kumar for the Petitioner.
- C.S.C. for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner was a registered dealer and the department blocked ITC of petitioner on ground that ITC was not genuine since supplier was found to be non-existent at his disclosed place of business. It filed writ petition against the order and contended that the supplier had submitted application for amendment of core field in registration particulars including change of place of business from Hapur to Ghaziabad.
High Court Held
The Honorable High Court noted that the GSTN had recorded change of address of the supplier from Hapur to Ghaziabad. The Court also noted that the change was applied by the supplier on 06.10.2023 i.e. four days prior to the impugned communication.
However, the department passed the order on 10.10.2023.Therefore, the Court held that the order was wholly ex-parte and the petitioner was directed to file an application before the department to recall the order and the department was directed to verify the correct facts from the GSTN and pass appropriate and reasoned order within a period of one week from the date of filing that application.
The post HC Directs AO to Recall Order Blocking ITC as Supplier’s Change of Address Was Approved By GSTN appeared first on Taxmann Blog.
