Taxpayer Wins Challenge Against Deficient GST Assessment Order, Securing Comprehensive Reevaluation of Input Tax Credit Claims

GST assessment order challenged due to inadequate consideration of taxpayer's objections. HC found the assessment order deficient in addressing key contentions regarding Input Tax Credit claims. Court quashed the order and directed reassessment within two months, mandating a fresh hearing and comprehensive evaluation of taxpayer's submissions. Writ petition disposed without costs.

---

---

Issues:
The judgment involves the assessment order dated 20.12.2023 being challenged by the petitioner primarily on the ground that objections raised in the reply dated 12.07.2022 were not considered.

Details:
The petitioner, a registered person under applicable GST enactments and a manufacturer of garments, received an audit report on 21.02.2022, followed by an intimation and a show cause notice in May and June 2022, respectively. The petitioner replied to the show cause notice on 12.07.2022, leading to the impugned assessment order dated 20.12.2023.

Upon examination of the impugned assessment order, it was observed that it dealt with two main issues: wrong availment of Input Tax Credit (ITC) due to the claim of a higher rate of drawback and wrong availment of ITC due to the claim of rebate of State levies. The petitioner's counsel highlighted that while the order referred to the taxpayer's reply, it did not discuss or record findings on the issues raised in the reply. Additionally, it was noted that 10% of the disputed tax demand was remitted by the petitioner on 27.02.2024. The petitioner also raised concerns about the audit report being submitted beyond the period of limitation.

In response, the senior standing counsel for the respondent argued that the audit report was not issued beyond the prescribed period of limitation under Section 65 of the applicable GST enactments when considering the petitioner's email dated 04.08.2021.

Given the lack of discussion or findings on the petitioner's contentions in the assessment order, the court found it necessary to quash the order and remand the matter for reconsideration. The assessing officer was directed to provide the petitioner with a reasonable opportunity, including a personal hearing, and to issue a fresh assessment order that duly considers all the petitioner's contentions. This process was mandated to be completed within two months from the date of receiving a copy of the court's order.

Ultimately, the writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed accordingly.

---