REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Patanjali Ayurved Ltd. Appellant

V/S

UNION OF INDIA Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

BROWN V. ALLWEATHER MECHANICAL CO. [REFERRED TO]
CST V. SATYAM SHIVAM PAPERS (P) LTD [REFERRED TO]
VEENA ESTATE (P.) LIMITED V. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX U P VS. MODI SUGAR MILLS LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF TAMIL NADU VS. M K KANDASWAMI [REFERRED TO]
RAMANA DAYARAM SHETTY VS. INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
SANJEEV COKE MANUFACTURING COMPANY BHARAT COKING COAL LIMITED VS. BHARAT COKING COAL LTD:SANJEEV COKE MANUFACTURING COMPANY [REFERRED TO]
SHIV DUTT RAI FATEH CHAND OM PRAKASH SHEO PRAKASH VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
SUBE SINGH VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
GUJARAT TRAVANCORE AGENCY COCHIN VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX KERALA ERNAKULAM [REFERRED TO]
DIRECTOR OF ENFORCEMENT VS. M C T M CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
PRATIBHA PROCESSORS VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
N C DHOUNDIAL VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX DELHI VS. SHRI KRISHNA ENGG CO [REFERRED TO]
STANDERED CHARTERED BANK VS. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT [REFERRED TO]
CHAIRMAN SEBI VS. SHRIRAM MUTUAL FUND [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. DHARMENDRA TEXTILE PROCESSORS [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF TAMIL NADU VS. K SHYAM SUNDER [REFERRED TO]
RAHIMBHAI KARIMBHAI NAGRIWALA VS. B B PATEL [REFERRED TO]
RAGHUNANDAN PRASAD MOHAN LAL BAREILLY VS. INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [REFERRED TO]
FILM EXHIBITORS GUILD VS. STATE [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the petitioner has prayed for the issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned Show Cause Notice No.02/2024-25 issued on April 19, 2024 vide Form GST DRC-01 reference No.DGGI/INV/GST/2179/2020/GRU/634(S/L) by Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence (DGGI), Ghaziabad Regional Unit, (hereinafter referred to as 'respondent no.2') bearing CBIC DIN-202404DNN40000555A8B, to the extent of exorbitant unexplained penalty of Rs.2,735,113,681.00 proposed to be levied against the petitioner firm under Sec. 122 (1), clause (ii) and (vii) of the Central Goods and Service Tax, Act 2017 (hereinafter referred to as 'CGST Act') and respective State Statutes namely Uttarakhand Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, Haryana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Maharastra Goods and Services Tax, 2017 read with Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

(2.) Factual matrix giving rise to the instant petition is delineated below:

(3.) Mr. Arvind Datar, Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has made the following submissions:

Click here to view full judgment.

PATANJALI AYURVED LTD. Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address