2024 (12) TMI 1119 - HC - GST

Challenge to final order passed by the Goods and Services Tax Officer, in terms of which the Show Cause Notice proceedings have come to be concluded against the petitioner/assessee - mismatch between the disclosures appearing in GSTR-3B and GSTR-01 - it is contended that the mere subsequent cancellation of registration of those suppliers would not have justified the passing of the final order - HELD THAT - The respondents, submitted that rather than the matter being kept pending on the board of this Court, the ends of justice would warrant the impugned order being set aside, subject to liberty being reserved to the respondents to decide the matter afresh. The final order dated 27 August 2024 is quashed. The GST Officer shall proceed to decide the SCN proceedings afresh bearing in mind the reply which has been submitted by the writ petitioner and by passing a reasoned and speaking order. All rights and contentions of respective parties on merits are kept open - petition allowed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Challenge to final order passed by the Goods and Services Tax Officer.
2. Dispute regarding cancellation of registration of certain firms and denial of Input Tax Credit.
3. Alleged mismatch between disclosures in GSTR-3B and GSTR-01.
4. Failure of the GST Officer to consider the petitioner's reply and provide reasoning for rejecting contentions.

Detailed Analysis:
1. The petitioner challenged the final order passed by the Goods and Services Tax Officer following the conclusion of Show Cause Notice proceedings. The order demanded payment of tax, interest, and penalty for undeclared output liability and unavailed Input Tax Credit. During the hearing, the authorized representative failed to justify the taxpayer's version, leading to the creation of a demand. The petitioner was aggrieved by the order and approached the court seeking relief.

2. The dispute arose due to the subsequent cancellation of registration of four identified firms, leading to the denial of Input Tax Credit. The petitioner contended that the mere cancellation of suppliers' registration did not justify the final order issued against them. Details of the cancelled firms and their turnover were provided in response to the original Show Cause Notice, highlighting discrepancies in the GST Officer's observations.

3. An issue was raised regarding the mismatch between the disclosures in GSTR-3B and GSTR-01, with a small percentage of the total demand attributed to these transactions. The petitioner argued that this discrepancy should not have resulted in the imposition of the demand without proper consideration of the submitted reply and reasoning for rejecting the contentions raised.

4. The court noted that the GST Officer failed to consider the petitioner's reply adequately and did not provide any reasoning for dismissing the contentions raised. As a result, the court set aside the final order dated 27 August 2024 and directed the GST Officer to reconsider the Show Cause Notice proceedings, taking into account the petitioner's submission and issuing a reasoned order. The court kept all rights and contentions of the parties open for further proceedings and reserved the challenge to certain notifications for appropriate consideration if needed.