2024 (10) TMI 124 - HC - GST

Principles of natural justice - non-consideration of the petitioner s replies - HELD THAT - Even in the matters, although the petitioner had filed replies, they were not considered, and the impugned orders were passed without providing sufficient reasons for rejecting the petitioner s explanations. In view of the above, the orders impugned herein are set aside. The petitioner shall file their replies/objections along with any required documents to the respondent within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Upon receipt, the respondent shall issue a 14-day clear notice, schedule a personal hearing, and thereafter pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with the law as expeditiously as possible. These writ petitions are disposed of.

Summary

Issues:
Challenging Orders-in-Original in Form GST DRC-07, Non-consideration of petitioner's replies, Setting aside impugned orders, Remanding for reconsideration, Providing opportunity for submission of additional documents, Lack of reasons for rejecting explanations.

Analysis:
The writ petitions were filed to challenge the Orders-in-Original in Form GST DRC-07 and seek a de novo order from the respondent. The petitioner contended that despite submitting detailed reconciliations in response to show cause notices issued under Section 74 of the CGST Act, the respondent did not consider the replies and issued fresh notices proposing tax demands on the same grounds. The petitioner appeared in person, filed replies in Form GST DRC-06, but the respondent passed the impugned orders without considering the submissions. The crux of the issue was the non-consideration of the petitioner's replies, similar to a previous case where orders were set aside for the same reason.

The learned Government Advocate for Taxes did not dispute the contention that the petitioner's replies were not duly considered. The Court noted that the impugned orders lacked findings on reasons for rejecting the petitioner's explanations, as exemplified in a previous case where detailed scrutiny of replies was absent. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned orders and remanded the matters for reconsideration, allowing the petitioner to submit additional documents within two weeks. The respondent was directed to provide a reasonable opportunity for a personal hearing and issue fresh orders within three months from receiving the additional documents.

In another similar case, the petitioner's replies were not adequately considered, leading to the setting aside of the impugned orders. The Court directed the petitioner to file replies and necessary documents within two weeks, after which the respondent was instructed to schedule a personal hearing, issue a clear notice, and pass appropriate orders promptly. The writ petitions were disposed of with no costs, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed, emphasizing the importance of due consideration of submissions and providing reasons for rejecting explanations.

Overall, the judgment highlighted the significance of considering the petitioner's replies, providing opportunities for submissions, and ensuring that orders are passed with proper reasoning and adherence to the law. The Court's decision to set aside the impugned orders and remand the matters for reconsideration underscored the importance of procedural fairness and thorough examination of submissions in tax matters.