2024 (2) TMI 1209 - HC - GST

Validity of SCN seeking to create a demand under Section 73 Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - SCNs are bereft of any details and are not in inconsonance with law - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - Reference may be had to the reply filed by the petitioner to the Show Cause Notice which shows that the reply is a detailed comprehensive reply adverting to each of the points raised in the Show Cause Notice. Ex-facie it is apparent that the proper officer has not taken into consideration the reply filed by the petitioner while passing the cryptic order dated 31.12.2023. Consequently, the order dated 31.12.2023 cannot be sustained and is accordingly set aside. The matter is remitted to the proper officer to re-adjudicate the Show Cause Notice dated 29.09.2023 by taking into account the detailed reply filed by the petitioner thereto. In case any further detail or clarification is required from the petitioner, the proper officer shall intimate the petitioner qua the same and petitioner shall thereafter promptly furnish his explanation/reply/document to this query, if any raised. The proper officer shall pass a speaking order after giving an opportunity of a personal hearing to the petitioner within four weeks - The issue of jurisdiction as well as validity of the Show Cause Notice dated 29.09.2023 is left open. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues involved:
The judgment involves the challenge to Show Cause Notices dated 06.09.2023 and 29.09.2023 under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, alleging lack of details and non-compliance with the law.

Impugned Show Cause Notices:
The petitioner challenged the Show Cause Notices dated 06.09.2023 and 29.09.2023, claiming they lacked details and were not in line with the law. The department withdrew the first notice and adjudicated the second notice. The order passed on 31.12.2023 created a demand against the petitioner, citing the reply as non-comprehensive and unsupported by sufficient documents.

Insufficient Consideration of Reply:
The Court noted that the order dated 31.12.2023 did not consider the detailed reply filed by the petitioner to the Show Cause Notice. Consequently, the Court set aside the order and remitted the matter to the proper officer for re-adjudication, emphasizing the need to consider the petitioner's detailed response for a fair decision.

Remedial Actions Ordered:
The Court directed the proper officer to re-adjudicate the Show Cause Notice dated 29.09.2023, considering the petitioner's detailed reply. The officer was instructed to seek further clarification if needed and provide the petitioner with an opportunity to respond. A speaking order, including a personal hearing for the petitioner, was mandated within four weeks.

Jurisdiction and Validity:
The judgment left the issues of jurisdiction and validity of the Show Cause Notice dated 29.09.2023 open for further consideration. The petitioner was advised to seek available legal remedies if still aggrieved by any subsequent order.

Disposition of Petition:
The petition was disposed of in accordance with the above terms, ensuring a fair re-adjudication process based on the petitioner's detailed response to the Show Cause Notice.