Page 89 - GSTL_6th August 2020_Vol 39_Part 1

2020 ] MAHAVIR ENTERPRISE v. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX 15
CASES CITED
Ajay Canu v. Union of India — AIR 1988 SC 2027 — Relied on ........................................................ [Para 27]
Commissioner v. Charminar Nonwovens Ltd. — 2004 (167) E.L.T. 372 (S.C.) — Relied on . [Paras 21, 22]
Indian Cardboard Industries Ltd. v. Collector — 1992 (58) E.L.T. 508 (Cal.) — Referred ............. [Para 22]
Registrar, Co-operative Societies v. Kunjabmu — AIR 1980 SC 350 — Relied on .......................... [Para 26]
St. Johns Teachers Training Institute v. Regional Director, National Council for Teacher Education
— AIR 2003 SC 1522 — Relied on ................................................................................................. [Para 26]
Standard Chartered Bank v. Directorate of Enforcement
— 2006 (197) E.L.T. 18 (S.C.) — Relied on .................................................................................. [Para 20]
State of Nagaland v. Ratan Singh — AIR 1967 SC 212 — Relied on .................................................. [Para 26]
State of Uttar Pradesh v. Anil Kumar Ramesh Kumar Chandra Glass Works
— (2005) SCC 451 — Relied on ............................................................................................ [Paras 21, 22]
Union of India v. Vicco Laboratories — 2007 (218) E.L.T. 647 (S.C.) — Relied on .......................... [Para 23]
REPRESENTED BY : Shri Avinash Poddar, for the Applicant.
Ms. Manisha Lavkumar Shah, Government Pleader
with Shri Dharmesh Devnani, AGP, for the
Respondent.
[Order per : J.B. Pardiwala, J. (Oral)]. - By this writ application under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ applicant, a proprietary concern
through its proprietor, has prayed for the following reliefs :
“(a) Quash and set aside the show cause notice in Form GST DRC-01,
dated 30-11-2019 at Annexure A to this petition.
(b) declare the Rule 142(1)(a) of CGST/GGST Rules, being ultra vires
and de hors the Act and violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the
Constitution of India, to the extent it says notice issued under Sec-
tion 122.
(c) Pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition,
(i) Proceeding and Adjudication of impugned show cause notice
at Annexure A to this petition to be stayed; and
(ii) No coercive action to be taken against the petitioners;
(d) Grant ad interim reliefs in terms of prayers above;
(e) Any other and further relief deemed just and proper be granted in
the interest of justice;
(f) To award Costs of and incidental to this application be paid by the
Respondents;
2. The facts giving rise to this writ application may be summarised as
under :
2.1 The writ applicant seeks to challenge the legality and validity of the
show cause notice dated 30th November, 2019 issued by the respondent No. 1
under Section 122(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short,
‘the CGST Act’) calling upon the writ applicant to show cause why an amount of
Rs. 6,87,68,821/- (Rupees Six Crore Eighty Seven Lac Sixty Eight Thousand Eight
Hundred Twenty One only) should not be recovered for the alleged contraven-
tion of the provisions of the Act and the Rules.
3. Prima facie, it appears on plain reading of the impugned show cause
notice that it is the case of the department that the writ applicant is involved in
bogus billing transactions without any physical movement of the goods.
GST LAW TIMES  6th August 2020  89