In a recent ruling by the Delhi High Court, a dispute over the extension of notification periods was resolved between the Proper Officer and a taxpayer involved. The case presented challenges related to Notification No. 9 of 2023 and No. 56 of 2023, addressing the extension of time. Let’s delve into the details of this significant legal development.
Arguments
- The Respondent failed to provide sufficient documents in support of their reply.
- The reply uploaded by the Respondent was found to be unsatisfactory by the tax authorities.
- The tax authorities proposed a demand of Rs. [amount] due to lack of adequate documentation.
- The Respondent is required to provide additional supporting documents to address the issue raised in the notice.
Analysis
- Proper Officer is required to consider the reply filed by the Petitioner on merits.
- The reply dated 12.01.2024 was detailed and included supporting documents.
- It is necessary for the Proper Officer to form an opinion based on the reply submitted.
- The court did not comment on the merits of the contentions from either party
- The judge found the taxpayer’s reply to be unsatisfactory and lacking sufficient supporting documents
- It was noted that the period prescribed under Section 75 (3) of the Act was not clearly demonstrated by the taxpayer
Decision
- The challenge to Notification No 9 of 2023 and 56 of 2023 regarding the extension of time is left open.
- All rights and contentions of parties are reserved.
- The petition is disposed of based on the above terms.
Case Title: SETHIA ENTERPRISES THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR MR VIKASH JAIN Vs. COMMISSIONER DELHI GOODS AND SERVICE TAX AND OTHERS (2024:DHC:4422-DB)
Case Number: W.P.(C)-7730/2024
