2024 (4) TMI 283 - HC - GST

Seeking one more opportunity to produce all proofs of payments made through bank channel - Demand alongwith penalty - excess claim Input Tax Credit - ITC claimed from cancelled dealers return defaulters and tax nonpayers - HELD THAT - Perusal of the letter dated 03.12.2023 shows that petitioner was given an opportunity to personally appear and there was no requirement stipulated therein to produce any bank payment proofs. As per the petitioner if given an opportunity petitioner shall be able to produce all proofs of payments made through bank channel. The impugned order dated 29.12.2023 is set aside. The matter is remitted to Proper Officer for re-adjudication. Proper Officer is directed to intimate to the petitioner details/documents as maybe required to be furnished by the petitioner. Petitioner shall produce all the relevant documents as inter-alia the clarification with regard to the HSN Code and also the proof of payment made through the banking channel before the proper officer within a period of one week from today thereafter proper officer shall decide the show cause notice after giving an opportunity of personal hearing and shall pass a fresh speaking order in accordance with law within the period prescribed under Section 75(3) of the Act. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues Involved:
The judgment involves the disposal of a Show Cause Notice proposing a demand under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, based on excess claim Input Tax Credit and ITC claimed from cancelled dealers, return defaulters, and tax nonpayers.

Impugned Order Analysis:
The petitioner challenged an order disposing of the Show Cause Notice and raising a demand against them under Section 73 of the Act. The Department had given separate headings for excess claim Input Tax Credit and ITC claimed from specific categories. The petitioner provided a detailed reply addressing each of these points.

Contentions and Observations:
The impugned order noted that the taxpayer had not filed an online reply or appeared for a personal hearing. The Proper Officer opined that the petitioner was not eligible to claim ITC under Section 16 of the Act due to lack of bank payment proof for certain invoices. The petitioner contended that they had responded to all points raised and that their representative had appeared, although not asked to provide bank payment proof.

Court's Decision and Directions:
The Court found that a reminder had been issued to the petitioner, which did not require the production of bank payment proofs. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remitted to the Proper Officer for re-adjudication. The Proper Officer was directed to request necessary documents from the petitioner, who was to provide relevant documents, including proof of payment through banking channels, within one week. The Proper Officer was instructed to decide on the Show Cause Notice after a personal hearing and pass a fresh order within the prescribed period.

Additional Directions and Conclusion:
If further documents were needed, the Proper Officer was to inform the petitioner accordingly. The Court clarified that it did not comment on the merits of the parties' contentions, reserving all rights and contentions. The petition and pending applications were disposed of based on the above terms.