Petition filed against GST Scrutiny Notice alleging it Issued beyond S. 61 : Jharkhand HC directs to file Reply [Read Order]
The assessing authority was directed to consider the reply and proceed further as per Section 61 of the JGST Act.
![Petition filed against GST Scrutiny Notice alleging it Issued beyond S. 61 : Jharkhand HC directs to file Reply [Read Order]](https://images.taxscan.in/h-upload/2025/07/26/2069284-gst-gst-scrutiny-taxscan.webp "Petition filed against GST Scrutiny Notice alleging it Issued beyond S. 61 : Jharkhand HC directs to file Reply [Read Order]")
The Jharkhand High Court has disposed of a writ petition filed challenging a scrutiny notice and consequential show cause notice under the GST ( Goods and Services Tax) Act, by directing the petitioner to file a detailed reply to the GST department. The petitioner, BPL-KPL(JV) had alleged that the scrutiny notice in Form GST ASMT-10, dated 23.09.2024, was issued in violation of the...
The Jharkhand High Court has disposed of a writ petition filed challenging a scrutiny notice and consequential show cause notice under the GST ( Goods and Services Tax) Act, by directing the petitioner to file a detailed reply to the GST department.
The petitioner, BPL-KPL(JV) had alleged that the scrutiny notice in Form GST ASMT-10, dated 23.09.2024, was issued in violation of the scope and procedural boundaries outlined under Section 61 of the CGST/JGST Act, 2017.
Understand the complete process and tax nuances of GST refunds, Click here
It also contested the subsequent show cause notice dated 17.05.2025 issued in Form DRC-01 under Section 74 for FY 2020-21, asserting that the allegations of suppression were baseless particularly since a notice for the subsequent FY 2021-22 had already been issued under the milder provisions of Section 73.
The petitioner argued that the invocation of Section 74, which deals with fraud or willful suppression, was unjustified when the facts were similar across both financial years. The company prayed for quashing of both notices and sought an interim injunction to restrain the tax department from proceeding further with the disputed notices.
During the hearing, the State, submitted that an identical issue had already been considered by the High Court in W.P. (T) No. 4882 of 2024, where the Court had granted liberty to the petitioner in that case to submit a reply to the scrutiny notice. Upon such reply, the department was directed to consider it on merits and take follow-up action strictly in accordance with the law.
Complete GST Act & Rules with amendments made by financial bill, 2025 - Click Here
Acting Chief Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad and Justice Rajesh Kumar , considering the parity in facts, noted that the petitioner had not disputed the precedent cited by the State. Following the earlier approach, the Court disposed of the present writ petition by allowing BPL-KPL (JV) to submit its explanation within two weeks from the date of the order.
The assessing authority was directed to consider the reply and proceed further as per Section 61 of the JGST Act.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
