9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (7) TMI 246 - HC - GSTViolation of principles of natural justice - documents filed by the petitioner were not taken into consideration while confirming the tax proposals - awarded to the petitioner by the Coimbatore Municipal Corporation - pure service contracts - exempt supply or not - HELD THAT - As regards exempted supply, the petitioner has placed on record a document indicating that the work was awarded to the petitioner by the Coimbatore Municipal Corporation. In addition, the petitioner has also placed on record communications from the Coimbatore Municipal Corporation awarding service contracts to the petitioner. Also annexed are certificates from the Assistant Executive Engineer, Coimbatore Municipal Corporation with regard to specific items of work, including amounts paid in respect thereof. Prima facie, these documents indicate that these were pure service contracts. However, this is required to be established by the petitioner by submitting all relevant documents. Since the demand with regard to defect constitutes a substantial portion of the overall demand, the matter requires re-consideration by putting the petitioner on terms. The impugned order dated 30.03.2024 is set aside on condition that the petitioner remits a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- towards the disputed tax demand within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - petition disposed off.
Issues Involved:
Assessment order challenged for not considering petitioner's documents for tax proposals under an exemption notification. Analysis: The petitioner contested an assessment order dated 30.03.2024, arguing that documents supporting exemption under Notification No.12/2017 were not considered. The petitioner had contracts with the Coimbatore Municipal Corporation for services exempt from tax. In response to audit observations, the petitioner provided explanations and reversed Input Tax Credit. The impugned order was issued based on these responses. The petitioner's counsel claimed that relevant work orders were submitted along with replies. Despite providing documents like IT returns and bank statements, the claim for exemption was rejected for lack of a contract agreement. The counsel argued that if asked, the petitioner would have submitted additional documents like certificates from the Corporation. The respondent dropped proceedings on some defects and agreed to segregate proceedings on others. The petitioner agreed to pay Rs. 3,00,000 as a condition for remand. The Government Advocate contended that the assessing officer considered the petitioner's reply but confirmed the tax proposal due to failure in establishing complete exemption under Notification No.12/2017. The petitioner provided documents showing contracts with the Corporation and certificates from the Assistant Executive Engineer. However, the petitioner needed to submit all relevant documents to establish the nature of the contracts. The court deemed it necessary to reconsider the matter by putting the petitioner on terms due to the substantial demand related to a specific defect. The court set aside the impugned order on the condition that the petitioner pays Rs. 3,00,000 towards the disputed tax demand within three weeks and submits additional documents within the same period. Upon receiving the payment and additional documents, the respondent was directed to provide a reasonable opportunity for a personal hearing and issue a fresh order within three months. In conclusion, the petition was disposed of with no costs, and related motions were closed as per the terms outlined in the judgment.
|
