2018 Taxo.online 451
WRIT TAX No. – 1432 of 2018 dated 02.11.2018
M/s RATHI STEEL POWER LIMITED
UNION OF INDIA AND 2 ORS.
2018
GST
Pankaj Mithal, Justice & Ajit Kumar, Justice
In favour of revenue
High Court
Allahabad
Represented by: –
Petitioner: – Anil Prakash Mathur
Respondent: – Krishna Agarawal
Order: –
Heard Sri A.P. Mathur, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Krishna Agarawal, learned counsel appearing for respondent nos. 2 and 3.
The petitioner by means of this writ petition has made prayer for quashing of the attachment order dated 10.10.2018, which has been filed as annexure 3 to the writ petition.
The movable properties of the petitioner have been attached on 10.10.2018 by respondent no. 3 on the basis of the warrant/ notice Form No. I dated 3.10.2018, which was a notice of demand to the petitioner for the payment of excise dues and Central Goods and Service Tax (CGST).
The petitioner has not challenged the aforesaid demand notice dated 3.10.2018, rather we find that the petitioner had previously filed Writ Tax No. 1369 of 2018, M/S Rathi Steel And Power Ltd. v. Principal Chief Commissioner Of Central Tax Meerut And 2 Others . In the said writ petition, the petitioner referring to the aforesaid demand notice dated 3.10.2018 had prayed that the directions be issued to the authorities to accept the excise dues from the petitioner in 12 equal installments and that three months time be allowed to it to wash out the liability of CGST.
In view of prayer made in the above writ petition, petitioner accepted the liability of the excise dues and the GST and was ready and willing to make payment thereof in installments and three months respectively.
The said writ petition was got dismissed as withdrawn on 12.10.2018 without liberty to file any fresh petition meaning thereby that the petitioner accepts the demand of dues.
The present attachment which is impugned in the writ petition is pursuant to the above demand notice and is of a consequential nature. The petitioner cannot be granted any relief unless the demand is successfully challenged which stage is already over.
The stage of show cause notice or opportunity of hearing before issuing the demand is over and there is no useful purpose to reiterate the same
In view of aforesaid facts and circumstances, we do not find any merit in the petition and the same is accordingly dismissed .
