Sales Tax Bar Association (Regd,) & Another Versus Union Of India & Others
GST
2018 (6) TMI 171 – DELHI HIGH COURT – 2018 (16) G. S. T. L. 194 (Del.)
DELHI HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 15-5-2018
W. P. (C) 9575/2017
GST
Sanjiv Khanna And Chander Shekhar, JJ.
For the Petitioners : Mr. Puneet Agrawal, Mr. Sanjay Sharma, Mr. Rakesh Kumar Aggrawal, Mr. Puneet Rai, Mr.Purvi Sinha and Mr. Naveen Madan, Advs.
For the Respondents : Mr. Anurag Ahluwalia, CGSC with Mr. Abhigyan Siddhant and Mr. Abhimanyu Singh, Adv. for UOI/R-1 Mr. Satyakam, Standing Counsel with Ms. Manpreet, L.A., DTT, for R-2 & R-3 Ms. Nidhi Mohan Parashar and Mr. Umang Kumar Singh, Advs. for R-4 Ms. Nitya Sharma, Adv. for GST Council
ORDER
Ld. Counsel for the
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
portal does not permit rectification of a return already filed. Rectification is to be made in the subsequent return. Nevertheless authorities are issuing notices to the assessees whenever rectification is made, treating rectification as a discrepancy between GSTR1 and GSTR3B. A large number of assessees are facing this problem.
The respondents would file response to the said assertions and allegations, in the form of status report. Prima facie we find merit in the submission that reply under the grievance mechanism should specifically deals with the issue raised and indicates the manner in which the same has been resolved and addressed.
The Ld. Counsel for the respondent states that petitioner in spite of repeated e-mails have failed to
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =