2020 (11) TMI 914 - Commissioner - GST

Refund of excess tax paid - principles of natural justice - appellant has mainly contested in their appeal memo that the adjudicating authority has passed the impugned orders in original without granting sufficient opportunity of personal hearing in the matter - HELD THAT - The adjudicating authority while rejecting the refund claims of the appellant neither considered their first request for seeking of some other date as per adjudicating authority's convenience nor discussed any relevant provisions of law/rules for rejection of their refund claims. It is also found that non-passing of speaking order indeed amount to denial of natural justice. Before passing of orders atleast their request for seeking of some other date for personal hearing in the matter should have been considered and at least speaking order should have been passed by giving proper opportunity of personal hearing in the matter to the appellant and detailing factors leading to rejection of refund claims. Such orders are not sustainable in the eyes of law and accordingly set aside. The appellant is directed to submit all relevant documents to the adjudicating authority and the claims will be processed by the adjudicating authority as per the provisions and procedure as prescribed under CGST Act, 2017 and CGST Rules. Appeal disposed off.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Appeals filed under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 against Orders-in-original rejecting refund claims.

Analysis:
- The appellant, engaged in Works Contract Service, filed refund claims under Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017 for excess tax paid in GSTR-3B returns for specific periods.
- Adjudicating authority issued show cause notices and subsequently rejected the refund claims without discussing relevant provisions of law/rules.
- Appellant challenged the impugned orders on grounds of denial of natural justice, violation of principles of natural justice, and failure to provide a proper opportunity for personal hearing.
- During the personal hearing, appellant's representative reiterated the grounds of appeal and requested a prompt decision.
- The Additional Commissioner found that the impugned orders lacked a discussion on legal provisions and rules, and the rejection of refund claims without proper consideration or opportunity for personal hearing was against the principles of natural justice.
- The Additional Commissioner highlighted the requirement for a speaking order and consideration of the appellant's request for rescheduling the personal hearing due to unavoidable circumstances.
- Citing the provisions of Rule 92 of the CGST Rules, the Additional Commissioner emphasized the necessity of providing an opportunity for the applicant to be heard before rejecting a refund application.
- Concluding that the impugned orders were unsustainable in law due to the denial of natural justice, the appeals were disposed of by setting aside the orders and directing the appellant to submit relevant documents for further processing by the adjudicating authority as per the prescribed procedures under the CGST Act, 2017 and CGST Rules.