Excess ITC Claims Order Invalidated Due to Procedural Violation of Mandatory Personal Hearing Rights Under Section 75(4)

HC found that the CGST/SGST order dated 05.05.2022 confirming excess ITC claims was procedurally defective. The court ruled that the petitioner was denied a mandatory personal hearing opportunity under Section 75(4) of CGST Act. The order was set aside and remanded to the Assistant Commissioner to provide a proper hearing, with the previous order treated as a show cause notice and the petitioner given 15 days to respond.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to legality and validity of excess input tax credit (ITC) claim under CGST and SGST orders dated 05.05.2022 without personal hearing opportunity.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the legality and validity of the order dated 05.05.2022 confirming excess ITC claims under CGST and SGST without a personal hearing opportunity. The Court noted that the show cause notice was issued on 30.04.2021, followed by reminders, and the impugned orders were passed almost a year later. The petitioner argued that no notice of personal hearing was provided. On the other hand, the respondents presented evidence that the petitioner had not conducted business activities for six years but was issuing GST invoices without supplying goods. The Court observed that Section 75(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, mandates granting a personal hearing opportunity when an adverse decision is contemplated. The respondents requested time to confirm if a notice was issued to the petitioner.

In a subsequent hearing, the respondents produced copies of the show cause notice and reminders issued to the petitioner, stating that the impugned order was uploaded on the common portal. The respondents contended that uploading on the common portal constituted valid notice under the Act. However, the petitioner argued that their GST registration was canceled, preventing access to the common portal. After due consideration, the Court opined that justice required granting the petitioner a personal hearing opportunity before a fresh order was passed by the Assistant Commissioner.

Consequently, the Court set aside the order dated 05.05.2022 and remanded the matter to the Assistant Commissioner for a fresh decision. The previous order was to be treated as a show cause notice, requiring the petitioner to respond within fifteen days. The Assistant Commissioner was directed to provide a proper opportunity for a hearing, including a personal hearing. The writ petition was disposed of, with pending miscellaneous applications to be closed without costs.

---