9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 50X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g was ever granted. Copies of Show Cause Notices were reflected on the portal but could not be downloaded/retrieved. Due to the said facts no proper opportunity to present the submissions has been given which violate the principle of natural justice and against the GST laws. There are force in the appellant's plea that the said impugned orders were passed without being heard to him. Further, the period involved in the instant cases are covered under the N/N. 35/2020-Central Tax, dated 3-4-2020. Further, amended N/N. 55/2020, dated 27-6-2020 by which time period has been extended for filing of reply upto 30-8-2020. Further, it is also provided in Rule 92(3) of CGST Rules, 2017 that no application for refund shall be rejected without giving the applicant an opportunity of being heard. Matter remanded back to the Adjudicating Authority for providing the proper opportunity of being heard to the appellant and pass the reason/speaking order - appeal allowed by way of remand. - 47 to 50 (MAA) CGST/JPR/2021 - - - Dated:- 19-2-2021 - Shri Manzoor Ali Ansari, Additional Commissioner (Appeals) ORDER These four appeals have been filed under Section 107 of the Central Goo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thly GSTR-3B physically. By filing the GSTR-3B physically instead on GST Portal, the GST liabilities paid/deposited/credited by the taxpayer remain lying in the Electronic Cash Ledger or Electronic Credit Ledger of the taxpayer available on GST portal as same are not debited or credit in Government Account due to non-filing of GSTR-3B electronically, which is resulted in not discharge of tax liabilities. Accordingly, show cause notices dated 3-4-2020 and 15-6-2020 were issued to the appellant proposing therein rejection of refund claims filed by the appellant. 3. Further, the adjudicating authority vide impugned Orders-in-Original in Form RFD-06, dated 19-4-2020, and 1-7-2020 respectively has passed the orders-in-original and rejected the refund claims on the ground that the provisions of Section 54(1) of CGST Act, 2017 only allows the refund claims of any amount paid on account of tax, interest, penalty etc., In the impugned case, the taxpayer has filed the GSTR-3B monthly return physically and by non-filing of 3B electronically on common portal, the GST liabilities paid/deposited/credited by the taxpayer remain lying in the Electronic Cash Ledger or Electronic Credit Ledger of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eplied nor sought extension. In the said context, it is respectfully submitted that due to nationwide lockdown on account of rise in COVID-19 pandemic, the appellant could not track the status of refund application and never came across the show cause notice in that period. Had the same ever been received by the appellants, the same could have been replied well in time. It is further submitted that, the Learned Adjudicating Authority has passed the impugned in haste, which is apparent from the fact that the same is issued within a period of 11 working days from the date of Show Cause Notice. Further, the same is issued against Notification No. 35/2020-Central Tax, dated 3-4-2020 issued by the Government by virtue of which the time limit for completion or compliance of any action including filing of any appeal, reply or application or furnishing of any report by any person which falls during the period from 20th March, 2020 to 29th June, 2020 had been extended till 30th June, 2020. The said time limit has further been extended till 30-8-2020 by virtue of Notification No. 55/2020-Central Tax. Copies of both the Notifications are enclosed. It is apparent from the above noti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hearing as is presumed to be mentioned in SCN, cannot be stretched to be deemed granted as hearing is to be fixed only where any adverse decision is contemplated against such person. This indicates that the Ld. Adjudicating Authority was prejudiced to give adverse decision prior to submission of reply by the noticee or appellant in this Appeal. Instead, date of hearing was to be granted by way of separate letter or notice subsequent to issue of SCN. Further, the appellant was also entitled to get three different opportunities, which were never granted to him, again leading to violations of principles of natural justice. that, the reason to deny the refund claim as stated in the impugned Order is that the appellants have not paid the tax amount in Government Account since the GST liabilities paid/deposited/credited by the appellants remain lying in their Electronic Cash Ledger or Electronic Credit Ledger and the same are not debited in Govt. Account and has resulted in non-discharge of tax liabilities whereas Section 54(1) of CGST Act, 2017 allows the refund of tax paid. At the same time, it is well accepted and endorsed by the learned Adjudicating Authority in this para 3 of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... chnologies Ltd., Bhiwadi vide show cause notice dated 3-4-2020 were asked to explain as to why the refund should not be rejected as there is no payment of tax in Government Account. Further, the Learned Adjudicating Authority was empowered to ask for any information, or any document, reconciliation of taxes or payments for his verification etc. or any undertaking/affidavit/guarantee to safeguard the revenue from the appellant to make himself satisfied for the sake of granting refund, but the same was not done which shows the revenue biased approach by way of denying the refund. that, the appellants were depositing the tax dues during the relevant period of time and they were nowhere at any fault in complying with the provisions of Law existed at the relevant time. In any case, even if, it is admitted that there was a technical glitch to pay/set off the monthly tax liabilities in view of the directions given by the Hon ble NCLT Order pronounced by the Court or resulting from issue of Notification No. 11/2020-Central Tax r/w Circular No. 138/08/2020-GST, dated 6-5-2020, the Appellants cannot be made to suffer with no fault of them by way of denying or delay in granting them the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e show cause notice has been submitted nor adjournment for submission of reply has been sought by the appellant. Opportunity of personal hearing has been given but the appellant did not attend the same. 8. In this context, appellant submitted-that due to nationwide lockdown due to COVID-19 pandemic, the company was shut down during the period from 22-3-2020 to 17-5-2020, so the appellant could not track the status of refund application and never came across the show cause notice in that period. Had the same have been received by the appellant, the reply could have been filed well in time. Further, the impugned orders have been passed against Notification No. 35/2020-Central Tax, dated 3-4-2020 issued by the Government by virtue of which the time limit for completion or compliance of any action including filing of any appeal, reply or application or furnishing of any report by any person which falls during the period from 20th March, 2020 to 29th June, 2020 had been extended till 30th June, 2020. The said time limit has further been extended till 30-8-2020 by virtue of Notification No. 55/2020-Central Tax. Further, he also stated that no notice of hearing has ever been received b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
