GST best judgement assessment order set aside due to COVID-19 impact on assessee's compliance

The Madras HC set aside an ex-parte order regarding GST best judgement assessment where the assessee failed to file returns and pay tax for 10 months due to COVID-19 and did not respond to show cause notice under Section 46. The Appellate Authority rejected the appeal solely on grounds of belated filing beyond prescribed time. The HC remitted the matter back to the Appellate Authority with directions to examine on merits based on available records and opportunity already provided under Section 107(8) of CGST Act, without requiring fresh hearing.

---

---

Issues:
1. Admissibility of Input Tax Credit for tax liability under C-GST Act.
2. Best Judgment assessment by Assessing Officer.
3. Appeal to Appellate Authority under C-GST Act.
4. Justification for belated filing of returns due to COVID-19 and registration revocation.
5. Adequacy of reasoning in Appellate Authority's decision.
6. Court's intervention and remand to Appellate Authority for fresh disposal.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner, engaged in works contract services, availed Input Tax Credit (ITC) for tax payment under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Due to COVID-19, they couldn't file returns for 10 months, leading to a notice from the Assessing Officer for non-filing. The AO conducted a Best Judgment assessment, which the petitioner appealed against to the Appellate Authority.

2. The Appellate Authority upheld the assessment, citing belated filing of returns as the primary reason. The Revenue counsel defended this decision, emphasizing the Authority's discretion to review facts. However, the Court found the lack of detailed reasoning in the Authority's decision unacceptable, especially regarding the reasons for the delay in filing returns.

3. The Court noted that the Appellate Authority should have considered the justifications provided by the petitioner for the delayed filings and returned a clear finding on the matter. As a result, the Court decided to intervene and remand the case back to the Appellate Authority for a fresh review based on available records and the opportunity already given to the petitioner.

4. The Court directed the Appellate Authority to expedite the review process within three weeks and communicate the decision to the petitioner promptly. The original decision of the Authority was set aside, emphasizing that the Court did not express any opinion on the merits of the case, leaving all questions open for the Authority's consideration in accordance with the law.

5. Ultimately, the Writ Petition was disposed of with the mentioned terms, and the Writ Miscellaneous Petition was closed without any costs imposed. The judgment focused on ensuring a fair and reasoned review of the petitioner's case by the Appellate Authority, highlighting the importance of providing adequate justifications for decisions in tax matters.

---