##PAGE1##

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH

AT SRINAGAR

(Through virtual mode from Jammu)

WP(C) No. 809/2024 Reserved on : 13.08.2025

Pronounced on: 24.12.2025

Uploaded on : 26.12.2025

Whether the operative part or judgment is

pronounced

TC Tours Limited …. Petitioner/Appellant(s)

Through:- Mr. Amrinder Singh, Advocate

Mr. Sheikh Umar Farooq, Advocate

V/s

Union Territory of J&K and ors. …..Respondent(s)

Through:- Mr. Mohsin Qadiri, Sr. AAG with

Ms. Maha Majeed, Assisting Counsel

CORAM : HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SINDHU SHARMA, JUDGE

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SHAHZAD AZEEM, JUDGE

JUDGMENT

Per : Sindhu Sharma-

01. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner against the

impugned order dated 06.03.2023 passed by respondent No. 3, vide which,

respondent No. 3 has rejected the appeal filed by the petitioner in Form

GST APL-02 for the reason that the dealer has not submitted hardcopy as

mandatory under Section 107 of the Jammu and Kashmir GST Act, 2017

(hereinafter to be referred to as ‘GST Act’).

02. The petitioner, it is submitted, is engaged in providing tour

related services by planning and organization of tours, arranging,

transportation, accommodation facilities, meals and guide services and also

assist in marketing the tourist destinations and tourism products. For

providing these services, the petitioner has procured various inputs and

WP(C) No. 809 of 2024

2

input services, in respect of which it avails the eligible Input Tax Credit

(ITC) as per the provisions of J&K GST Act.

03. The respondent No. 4 issued a show cause notice dated

14.12.2020 under section 73 of the GST Act proposing the demand of

CGST and SGST amounting to ₹8,57,286/- and ₹8,56,546/- along with the

applicable interest and penalty. This demand was proposed on the ground

that the petitioner had availed ITC in Form GSTR-3B as compared to ITC

available under Form GSTR-2A for the period, April 2019 to March 2020.

The show cause notice directed the petitioner to submit the reply to the

show cause notice along with supporting document by 14.01.2021,

however, the petitioner could not reply to the show cause notice for the

reason that his business was severely affected by Covid-19 and also that he

was not aware of the Show Cause Notice.

04. The demand of ₹17,14,572/- as proposed in the show cause

notice along with the applicable interest and penalty was confirmed by the

respondents vide order dated 02.06.2021. The petitioner filed an appeal

against the order dated 02.06.2021 on the GST portal on 27.08.2021 after a

pre-deposit of ₹ 1,71,458/-. The appeal was filed on the ground that the

petitioner had not availed the excess ITC during the relevant period, and

there was a mismatch between the ITC in Form GSTR-2A and Form

GSTR-3B because of reporting ineligible ITC and ITC reversal and

availment of ITC in subsequent financial year. The invoices, returns and

reconciliation in support of these assertions were also submitted by the

petitioner.

3

05. The appeal along with order dated 02.06.2021 as Annexure-II

was uploaded by the petitioner on the GST portal. The petitioner had also

received the provisional acknowledgement number after submission of the

appeal. However, the appeal filed by the petitioner was rejected by

respondent No. 3 by issuing Form GST APL-02 on 06.03.2023 on the

ground that the petitioner had not submitted the hard copy of the appeal.

06. The contention of the petitioner is that the appeal against the

order dated 02.06.2021 has been filed in Form GST APL-01 on 27.08.2021

in accordance with Section 107 of J&K GST Act read with Rule-108 of

J&K GST Rules and there is no requirement of filing a hard copy of the

appeal. The rejection of the appeal only on the ground of non-filing of the

hard copy is unwarranted especially when there is no such requirement

under rules. It is submitted that the appeal has been rejected without

providing any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner which is in violation

of principles of natural justice. Learned counsel for the respondents submits

that the petitioner h