2024 (7) TMI 597 - HC - GST

Violation of principles of natural justice - petitioner was not aware of proceedings because the notices and order were uploaded on the GST portal, but not communicated to the petitioner through any other mode - HELD THAT - The petitioner asserts that the services provided by him fall within the reverse charge mechanism. The petitioner has also placed on record a communication from the recipient of services confirming that GST was paid in respect of services received in 2018-2019. In these circumstances, the interest of justice warrants that an opportunity be provided to the petitioner by putting the petitioner on terms. The matter is remanded for reconsideration on condition that the petitioner remits 10% of the disputed tax demand as agreed to within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - impugned order is set aside - petition allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
1. Challenge to the order in original dated 28.07.2023 regarding GST liability under reverse charge mechanism.
2. Allegation of lack of awareness of proceedings due to communication only through GST portal.
3. Request for remand to contest tax demand based on recipient's confirmation of GST payment.
4. Dispute over the timing of communication confirming GST payment.
5. Request for reconsideration of the order and remand on condition of remitting 10% of disputed tax demand.
6. Directions for submission of reply to show cause notice, personal hearing, and issuance of a fresh order within three months.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner, a goods transport agency service provider, challenges the order in original dated 28.07.2023, claiming that services provided fall under the reverse charge mechanism of GST enactments. Allegations include lack of awareness of proceedings initiated through a show cause notice due to communication solely through the GST portal.

2. The petitioner seeks remand to contest the tax demand, citing a communication from a recipient confirming GST payment during the relevant financial year. The petitioner agrees to remit 10% of the disputed tax demand as a condition for the remand, emphasizing the need for another opportunity to address the tax liability on merits.

3. The Government Advocate points out that the impugned order followed due process with notices in Form GST ASMT 10, intimation, and a show cause notice. Personal hearing opportunities were provided on three occasions. Disputes arise regarding the timing of a communication confirming GST payment, which the respondent argues is subsequent to the original order.

4. The court, considering the petitioner's assertions and the communication from the recipient confirming GST payment, sets aside the order dated 28.07.2023 and remands the matter for reconsideration. The petitioner is directed to remit 10% of the disputed tax demand within 15 days and submit a reply to the show cause notice within the same period.

5. Upon receipt of the petitioner's reply and confirmation of the 10% remittance, the respondent is directed to provide a reasonable opportunity for a personal hearing and issue a fresh order within three months. The writ petition is disposed of without costs, and connected miscellaneous petitions are closed, ensuring a fair and just resolution to the dispute.