2021 (10) TMI 1115 - Commissioner - GST

Principles of natural justice - request of the appellant to conclude the case without issuance of SCN - HELD THAT - Any person aggrieved by any decision or order passed under this Act or the State Goods and Services Tax Act or the Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act by an adjudicating authority may appeal to such Appellate Authority as may be prescribed. Whereas, on going through the content of the letter against which the appellant has filed the appeal, it is found that it is not a Decision or Order as there is no findings or observation are given in the said letter or no provisions of law/Act has been discussed in the letter accordingly, the said letter does not come under the purview of definition of order/decision. Though, the definition of order/decision has not been given in GST law/Act however, it has been defined in various legal dictionary/form. It is apparent that order or decision is pronounced after an evaluation of facts and law with proper reasoning and discussion and findings whereas, on going through the content of the letter, that it is found that in the instant case, there is no findings or discussion or provisions of law are discussed therefore, appeal against the said letter is not maintainable/acceptable under Section 107(1) of CGST Act, 2017. This appeal is not maintainable and liable to be rejected.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Appeal filed against a letter issued by Assistant Commissioner regarding tax and penalty charges without show cause notice, grounds of appeal including penalty charged in violation of Section 74 of CGST Act, overvaluation of purchase price, wrong MRP considered, personal hearing held, definition of order/decision in GST law, appeal maintainability under Section 107(1) of CGST Act, 2017.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 against a letter issued by the Assistant Commissioner regarding tax and penalty charges without a show cause notice. The appellant contended that the charges were made without proper procedure and in violation of Section 74 of the CGST Act. Additionally, issues were raised regarding the overvaluation of purchase price, incorrect consideration of MRP as transaction value, and wrong GST rate in calculating the tax demand. The personal hearing was conducted in virtual mode, where the authorized representative reiterated the grounds of appeal.

Upon reviewing the submissions and the content of the letter, the Commissioner found that the letter did not constitute a decision or order as it lacked findings, observations, or a discussion of legal provisions. The Commissioner highlighted that an order or decision should involve an evaluation of facts and law with proper reasoning and discussion. As the letter in question did not meet these criteria, the Commissioner deemed the appeal not maintainable under Section 107(1) of the CGST Act, 2017. Therefore, the appeal was rejected without delving into the grounds submitted by the appellant.

In conclusion, the Commissioner held that the appeal was not maintainable due to the nature of the letter against which it was filed. The lack of findings, observations, or legal discussions in the letter rendered it outside the definition of an order or decision. As a result, the appeal was rejected without further consideration of the grounds raised by the appellant. The appeal was disposed of accordingly, emphasizing the importance of a valid order or decision for the appeal process under the GST law.