1. The petitioner is before this Court challenging the show cause notice and proceedings commenced under Section 74(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 essentially on the ground of jurisdiction as the extended period of limitation is sought to be invoked raising the impugned demand as per the say of the petitioner.

2. The petitioner is engaged in the manufacturing and selling of wheat flour and other such flours having their manufacturing unit. They have been engaged in the business since many years and are governed by the provisions of the Central Excise Act. They have also been registered under the Goods and Service Tax Act with effect from July, 2017.

2.1. It is the say of the petitioner that they sell the flour under the registered brand named Parivar Atta and all other through unregistered brand names. They have been disclosing their entire sales by filing the regular returns in the GST portal as prescribed and have not suppressed anything at any juncture.

2.2. On the basis of intelligence by the office of respondent no.2, their manufacturing premises had been visited on 15.09.2019 and the manufacturing activities and their mode and manner of discharging of the goods and services have been questioned.

2.3. It is the say of the petitioner that during the search operation, the full cooperation had been given and besides providing necessary documents, voluntarily the statements also have been given by the petitioner where he disclosed fully and truly all the aspects.

2.4. The petitioner avails exemption from the payment of GST in view of notification no. 28/2017 dated 22.09.2017, as according to them, they are eligible to zero rated supplies as prescribed for the sale of their products namely flour. For the period from 18.09.2020 to 30.09.2020 a demand is made for the payment of entire duty with interest and penalty. The petitioner sought to explain the said aspect. Besides complying with the conditions prescribed under the notification no. 28/2017, they have also disclosed all the aspects on regular basis.

2.5. It has seriously questioned the issuance of show cause notice under the provisions of Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act read with provision of Section 20 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act with the following prayers:-

“(A) That Your Lordships be pleased to issue an appropriate writ order or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari and or any other appropriate writ order or direction, quashing and setting aside the Show Cause Notice F No. DGGI/SZU/36-109/2020-21 Dtd 23-3-2021.

(B) That Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of prohibition or any other appropriate writ, direction or order, completely and permanently prohibiting the respondents, their servants and agents from taking any action against them in pursuance of Show Cause Notice No. DGGI/SZU/36- 109/2020-21 Dtd 23-3-2021.

(C) Pending hearing and final disposal of the present petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to restrain the respondents, their servants and agents from seeking any coercive recovery from the petitioners pursuant to the above referred SCN thereby staying implementation and execution of Show Cause Notice no. DGGI/SZU/36-109/2020-21 Dtd 23-3-2021;

(D) An ex-parte ad-interim relief in terms of para 9(C) above may kindly be granted pending the issuance of notice and further hearing of this petition;

(E) Any other further relief that may be deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also please be granted.”

3. We have heard extensively learned advocate Mr. Hasit Dave appearing for the petitioner who has on the ground of this being invocation of jurisdiction under the wrong provision has approached this Court. It is his say that under no circumstances, the authority concerned could have issued the show cause notice as there is no suppression of facts to evade the tax. It is not also a case of any tax short paid or the refund erroneously claimed. The officer concerned instead of invoking the provision of Section 73 has done it under Section 74. If at all the department had indicated that the petitioner is not being entitled for the exemption either on the branded or the unbranded products, they could have issued notice of demand within specified period of limitation under Section 73 however, by not so doing, it has issued the show cause notice under Section 74 which is impermissible, hence the present petition.

3.1. He has relied on the decision rendered by the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi in case of M/s. Nkas Services Private Limited vs. The State of Jharkhand and others [W.P.(T) No. 2444 of 2021, decided on 08/06.10.2021].

4. At this stage, learned advocate Mr. Dave seeks withdrawal of this petition with a request that the authority concerned may consider all his contentions which shall be raised in reply to the said show cause notice which shall also include the issue of jurisdiction.

5. His request is being acceded to. The present petition stands disposed of as withdrawn.

6. Direct service is permitted.