Tax Authority's Order Quashed: Petitioner Granted Fair Hearing with Comprehensive Review of Submitted Evidence Under Section 73

HC found the tax authority's order under Section 73 of CGST Act defective. The order rejecting the Petitioner's detailed reply was set aside. The court directed the tax officer to re-examine the case, request specific clarifications if needed, and issue a reasoned order after considering all submitted documents within prescribed timelines.

---

---

Issues involved:
The impugned order under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, disposing of a Show Cause Notice proposing a demand against the Petitioner without considering the detailed reply submitted by the Petitioner.

Detailed Judgment:
The Petitioner challenged an order dated 30.12.2023, which disposed of a Show Cause Notice proposing a demand against the Petitioner under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017. The Petitioner contended that despite filing a detailed reply on 29.12.2023, the impugned order did not take into consideration the reply and was cryptic in nature. The Department had raised issues regarding excess claim Input Tax Credit, ITC to be reversed on non-business transactions and exempt supplies, under declaration of ineligible ITC, and ITC claimed from cancelled dealers, return defaulters, and tax nonpayers. The Petitioner had provided a detailed reply addressing each of these issues. However, the impugned order deemed the reply incomplete and lacking supporting documents without proper consideration. The Court held that the Proper Officer did not adequately assess the reply and failed to request further details from the Petitioner if needed. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter to the Proper Officer for re-adjudication. The Proper Officer was directed to communicate any required details/documents to the Petitioner for furnishing explanations and documents, followed by re-adjudication and a fresh speaking order within the prescribed period. The Court clarified that it did not delve into the merits of the parties' contentions, reserving all rights and contentions. Ultimately, the petition was disposed of accordingly.

---