S/S DINESH KUMAR PRADEEP KUMAR
VERSUS
ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER GRADE 2 AND ANOTHER vide Writ Tax No. – 1082 of 2022 dated 25.07.2024 –
The Allahabad High Court in this case ruled that the penalty for excess stock should not have been imposed under Section 130 of the UPGST Act, but rather under Sections 73 & 74. The impugned order was set aside, and the writ petition was allowed, relieving the petitioner from the penalty. Relied upon previous judgments in the case of M/s Shree Om Steels and M/s Metenere Limited, wherein held that even if excess stock is found, proceedings should follow Sections 73 & 74, not Section 130.
In this case, a survey was conducted on petitioner led to the confiscation of goods and a penalty order for alleged excess stock. The Petitioner argued that survey was conducted under Section 67 of the UPGST Act, but proceedings should have been initiated under Sections 73 & 74 of the Act for excess stock. It was claimed that Section 35(3) prohibits proceedings under Section 130 against a registered dealer for such matters. Petitioner’s appeal was dismissed, leading to the current writ petition.
To read more about this Judgement, subscribe today: https://taxo.online/product/taxo-pro/
Already a subscriber, Click to LOGIN & refer to the TAXO GST CASE LAWS
Or
Call us:- +91 99101 67919, 99996 93426
