GST exempt turnover mismatch in GSTR-3B vs GSTR-1 and ignored reply/documents; assessment quashed and remanded for fresh decision.

The dominant issue was whether the assessment order was vitiated for breach of natural justice due to non-consideration of the taxpayer's reply and supporting documents explaining a discrepancy of about Rs. 50 lakhs in exempt turnover reported in GSTR-3B vis-à-vis GSTR-1. The HC held that the authority mechanically finalised the assessment without dealing with the reply/evidence and, if clarification on agricultural sales was needed, ought to have called for further particulars. The assessment order was quashed and the matter remitted with a direction to redo the assessment within four weeks, allowing the writ petition.

---

---

Issues Involved:
The writ petition filed for Writ of Certiorari to quash the impugned Assessment order dated 27.12.2022.

Details of the Judgment:

Issue 1: Assessment Discrepancies
The petitioner, a proprietrix of Chellam Mobiles registered under GST, reported a difference in taxable turnover for the Assessment year 2020-2021. The 2nd respondent issued intimation regarding discrepancies in exempted turnover and demanded interest for belated filing of returns. Despite the petitioner's submissions and explanations, the impugned order was passed without due consideration of evidence and documents provided.

Decision: The Court found that the respondents failed to consider the petitioner's detailed submissions and evidence. The impugned order was set aside and quashed, directing the respondents to redo the assessment within 4 weeks. The petitioner was instructed to provide further evidence, specifically regarding the exemption under Agriculture, and cooperate without seeking adjournments.

Key Points:
- The petitioner's detailed records were not adequately considered by the respondents.
- Lack of proper examination of evidence led to the quashing of the impugned order.
- The petitioner was granted the opportunity to submit additional evidence for assessment purposes.
- Cooperation without seeking adjournments was emphasized for the reassessment process.

This judgment highlights the importance of thorough examination of evidence and proper consideration of submissions in assessment proceedings to ensure a fair and just outcome.

---