TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
A remand order dictates the precise instructions under which an appellate court sends a case back to a lower court for further proceedings. The scope is strictly limited to the specific directions, issues, or instructions laid out in the appellate judgment; the lower court cannot reopen the entire case or exceed these bounds.
A case is remanded entirely if the trial court wrongly disposed of the suit on a preliminary point. A re-trial is permitted if a decree is reversed and further consideration is necessary. Appellate courts must not use remand orders as a routine tool. Remands are an exception, to be used sparingly when absolutely necessary to resolve gaps in evidence, rather than just for re-evaluating the merits of a completed.
In M/s. B.K. Steels Versus The Assistant Commissioner (State Tax), Hyderabad and another - 2026 (6) TMI 1092 - TELANGANA HIGH COURT, the High Court passed a common order on the proceedings related to the year 2022-23, on 25.07.2024, remanding the matter back to the original authority to decide the case afresh after giving a reasonable opportunity to the parties to the writ petitions. In onee remand proceedings the Authorities issued a fresh show cause notice. A final order was passed on 11.03.2026 under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
The said order provides that the parties fairly admitted that a right of personal hearing under Section 75(4) of the Act has not been provided to the petitioner before the passing the assessment order. Therefore, it has been agreed to set aside the impugned order and the High Court may direct the Adjudicating Authority to provide personal hearing to the petitioner and pass a fresh order in accordance with the law.
The High Court set aside the impugned orders and remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer. The High Court directed to give a personal hearing to the petitioner on 08.08.2024 or at any other date convenience to the Assessing Officer. The High Court also directed in the remanding no fresh notice will be issued to the petitioner. The High Court gave liberty to the petitioner to raise all possible grounds during the personal hearing. The High Court further held that the petitioner may file the reply to the show cause notice within 7 days from the date of the order.
In the remand proceeding, the Assessing Officer, without passing a fresh assessment order after giving a reasonable opportunity of the personal hearing to the petitioner, issued a second show cause notice and made assessment vide order dated 11.03.2026.
The same is the position in the second order issued by the High Court. In thie case also the Assessing Officer, without complying with the directions of the High Court, issued a second notice and confirmed the demand in its order. The order was challenged by the petitioner before the High court. The petitioner submitted the following before the High Court-
- The Assessing Officer cannot adjudicate afresh after issuing a second show cause notice which is against to the order passed by the High Court.
- The reply to the notice was not considered by the Assessing Officer.
- Similar order has been passed for the financial year 2023-24 passed by the High Court remanding the matter back to the Assessing Officer. In this case also a fresh show cause notice was issued and an adjudication order was passed confirming the demand on ground which were not taken in the show cause notice.
- Vide order dated 11.06.2026 the High court set aside the fresh assessment order while granting liberty to the proper officer to pass order afresh on the first show cause notice. Similar order may be passed in the present writ petition also.
The Department submitted that there is no difference in the show cause notice issued at the first instance and the second show cause notice on which adjudication has been made in the remand proceedings. The petitioner has not suffered any prejudice because of the order passed on the fresh show cause notice issued for the second time.
The High Court considered the submissions of both the parties. The High Court analysed the case. The High Court analysed the provisions of section 74 of the Act. The High Court observed in the remand proceedings the Assessing Officer was obliged to adjudicate the show cause notice issued for the first time, after giving a personal hearing to the petitioner. On the reply given by the petitioner the Assessing Officer has to adjudicate the case after giving a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner.
The Assessing Officer, without complying with the directions of the High Court issued a second show cause notice. This is not permissible. This would effect overreaching the order of the High Court. Therefore, the High Court is to interfere in the impugned adjudication order by setting aside the impugned order and again gave an opportunity to the Assessing Officer to pass an order on the basis of the first show cause notice and compliance of the order of the High Court, after giving a personal hearing and consider the reply given by the petitioner in accordance with law.
The High Court allowed the writ petition and set aside the impugned order.