Tax Credit Dispute: Appellant Granted Chance to Present Evidence and Challenge Registration Cancellation Under WBGST Act

HC remanded a tax dispute case involving input tax credit denial under WBGST Act. The court granted the appellant an additional opportunity to present supporting documents and evidence challenging the registration cancellation. The adjudicating authority was instructed to conduct a fresh hearing, review submitted materials, and issue a reasoned order based on substantive merits of the case.

---

---

Issues:
1. Challenge against order under Section 74(9) of WBGST Act, 2017.
2. Denial of input tax credit due to cancellation of dealer's registration.
3. Request for additional opportunity to present documents.
4. Remand of the matter for fresh consideration.

Analysis:
1. The judgment pertains to an intra-Court appeal challenging an order passed under Section 74(9) of the WBGST Act, 2017. The appellant had initially received a show cause notice and failed to appear for a scheduled hearing, leading to the order being passed on 21st June, 2022. The appellant subsequently submitted a representation seeking another chance to present documents and provide explanations.

2. The denial of input tax credit to the appellant was based on the cancellation of the registration of the dealer at the other end. The appellant contended that they possessed sufficient evidence to prove the genuineness of their transactions. In light of this, the Court found it appropriate to grant the appellant another opportunity to submit the relevant documents for consideration by the adjudicating authority.

3. Consequently, the Court decided to remand the matter back to the authority for fresh consideration. The appellant was directed to treat the order dated 21st June, 2022, as a show cause notice and submit a reply along with supporting documents by 10th February, 2023. The adjudicating authority was instructed to schedule a personal hearing promptly, where the appellant must present their case without seeking adjournment.

4. The judgment concluded by emphasizing that the adjudicating authority should evaluate the explanations and documents provided by the appellant and issue a detailed order based on merits and in compliance with the law. No costs were awarded, and the parties were granted an urgent certified copy of the order upon fulfilling the necessary formalities.

---