9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (10) TMI 272 - HC - GSTChallenge to impugned order of assessment and the consequential order passed in the rectification petition filed by the petitioner - non-application of mind - non-speaking order - impugned order of adjudication is challenged on the premise that the it has been passed without dealing with the petitioner's objections and without assigning any reasons for rejecting the detailed objection filed by petitioner - violation of principles of natural justice. Revenue would submit that the respondent would re-do the entire assessment. HELD THAT - The impugned order of assessment dated 30.06.2023 is set aside and the Writ Petition stands disposed of. The impugned order of assessment shall be treated as a show cause notice. The petitioner shall appear before the respondent on 03.10.2024 at 11.00 AM and submit their objections along with relevant documentary evidence. If any such objections are filed, the respondent shall consider the same and pass a speaking order in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of reasonable hearing to the petitioner. The Writ Petition challenging the order passed in the rectification petition filed by the petitioner, it was submitted by both the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondent that in view of the fact that the impugned order of assessment is now being set aside, nothing survives for adjudication in the said Writ Petition - Petition dismissed.
Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the impugned order of assessment dated 30.06.2023. 2. Non-consideration of objections and issuance of a non-speaking order. 3. Specific defects in the audit report, particularly Defect No.12 and Defect No.27. 4. Consequences of setting aside the impugned order on the rectification petition. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Validity of the Impugned Order of Assessment: The petitioner challenged the impugned order of assessment dated 30.06.2023, arguing that it was passed without adequately addressing the objections raised by the petitioner. The petitioner contended that the order suffered from non-application of mind and was a non-speaking order. The court noted that the order confirmed 31 out of 38 defects identified in the audit report without providing sufficient reasoning for rejecting the petitioner's detailed objections. 2. Non-consideration of Objections and Issuance of a Non-speaking Order: The petitioner argued that the impugned order was issued in haste and without proper consideration of the objections. The petitioner highlighted that the order merely stated that the objections were "not convincing and are not acceptable," without providing any substantive reasoning. This lack of detailed reasoning was a key point in the petitioner's challenge, asserting that the order was non-speaking and lacked application of mind. 3. Specific Defects in the Audit Report: - Defect No.12: The petitioner challenged the rejection of the Input Tax Credit (ITC) claim for the assessment year 2018-2019, which was based on the premise that the ITC was blocked in the financial year 2017-2018. The petitioner provided detailed objections, including documentary evidence, to demonstrate that the ITC was correctly availed. However, the respondent rejected the objection without adequate reasoning. - Defect No.27: This defect related to discrepancies in ITC availed in the electronic credit ledger, with differences noted between GSTR-3B, GSTR-2A, and GSTR-9. The petitioner argued that the ITC was availed based on tax invoices as per Section 16 of the CGST/TNGST Act 2017. The petitioner cited several judgments supporting their position that ITC should be allowed based on documents, not solely on GSTR-2A. The respondent dismissed these objections without proper justification, further demonstrating non-application of mind. 4. Consequences of Setting Aside the Impugned Order on the Rectification Petition: The court set aside the impugned order of assessment dated 30.06.2023, treating it as a show cause notice. The petitioner was directed to appear before the respondent and submit objections with relevant documentary evidence. The respondent was instructed to consider these objections and pass a speaking order after providing a reasonable hearing. Consequently, the related writ petition challenging the rectification order was rendered moot and closed, as the primary order was set aside. Overall, the judgment emphasized the need for a thorough and reasoned consideration of objections in tax assessments, highlighting procedural fairness and adherence to legal standards.
|
