9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (6) TMI 116 - HC - GSTValidity of order u/s 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - petitioner had not filed any reply/explanation, seeking one more opportunity - principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - Clearly, petitioner has made out a case that Petitioner was under the impression that the proceedings under Section 73 of the Act had been closed, since the proceedings under Section 61 of the Act had culminated because of which petitioner did not file a reply. Keeping in view the peculiar facts of the present case and since the only reason for passing the impugned order is that petitioner had not filed any reply/explanation, one opportunity needs to be granted to the petitioner to respond to the Show Cause Notice. The matter is liable to be remitted to the Proper Officer for re-adjudication. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 19.12.2023 is set aside. The Proper Officer shall re-adjudicate 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 by way of remand.
Issues involved: Impugning order disposing of Show Cause Notice u/s 73 of CGST Act, 2017 and creating demand against petitioner.
Judgment Details: 1. The petitioner challenged the order disposing of the Show Cause Notice proposing a demand against them u/s 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The order was set aside, and the matter was remitted to the Proper Officer for re-adjudication. 2. The petitioner, who was already facing proceedings u/s 61 of the Act, contended that they did not file a reply to the Show Cause Notice u/s 73 as they believed the proceedings had been closed after the proceedings u/s 61 concluded favorably. 3. The Show Cause Notice raised various grounds, including excess claim of Input Tax Credit, scrutiny of ITC availed, ITC reversals, and other related issues. 4. The Court acknowledged the petitioner's belief that the proceedings u/s 73 were closed due to the conclusion of proceedings u/s 61. As the impugned order was based on the petitioner not filing a reply, the Court granted the petitioner one opportunity to respond to the Show Cause Notice. 5. The petitioner was directed to file a further reply within four weeks, and the Proper Officer was instructed to re-adjudicate the matter, giving the petitioner a chance for a personal hearing and to pass a fresh order within the prescribed period u/s 75(3) of the Act. 6. The Court clarified that it did not delve into the merits of the parties' contentions and reserved all rights and contentions. Additionally, the challenge to Notification No. 9 of 2023 regarding the initial extension of time was left open. 7. The petition was disposed of with the above terms, providing the petitioner with an opportunity to respond to the Show Cause Notice and have the matter re-adjudicated by the Proper Officer.
|
