2024 (5) TMI 975 - HC - GST

Order Set Aside for Denial of Adjournment; Case Remitted for Re-adjudication Under CGST Act With Fresh Hearing.

M/s. Services International Versus Union Of India And Ors.

The HC set aside the impugned order under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017, due to the denial of an adjournment request, and remitted the matter for ... Request for extension of time to file reply on the ground that Accountant has suffered Jaundice and was not attending the office - challenge to an order passed under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- The impugned order dated 18.04.2024, mentions the date of personal as 18.04.2024 itself, however, the summary of proceedings does not show that any notice of personal hearing was issued to the petitioner after issuance of the subject Show Cause Notice. Keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, it would be in the interest of justice that an opportunity be granted to the petitioner to respond to the Show Cause Notice. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 18.04.2024 is set aside. The matter is remitted to the Proper Officer for re-adjudication and the Show Cause Notice is restored on the file of the proper officer. Petition is disposed of by way of remand. Issues Involved: The judgment involves the challenge to an order passed under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, regarding a demand raised against the petitioner for the Financial Year 2018-19. The petitioner sought an opportunity to respond to the Show Cause Notice and challenged Notification No. 09/2023.Summary of Judgment:Issue 1: Impugned Order and Show Cause NoticeThe petitioner challenged the order disposing of the Show Cause Notice proposing a demand against them for the Financial Year 2018-19 under Section 73 of the Act. The petitioner requested an extension of time to file a reply due to the Accountant's illness, but the order was passed without granting the requested adjournment.Issue 2: Lack of Response and AdjudicationThe petitioner's counsel highlighted that no information was received regarding the adjournment request, and the impugned order was passed without granting an opportunity to file a reply. The observations in the order noted the absence of a response from the taxpayer and upheld the demand along with the penalty.Issue 3: Court's DecisionConsidering the circumstances, the Court set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter to the Proper Officer for re-adjudication. The petitioner was directed to file a reply to the Show Cause Notice within 30 days, and the Proper Officer was instructed to pass a fresh order after a personal hearing within the prescribed period under Section 75(3) of the Act.Issue 4: Reservation of RightsThe Court clarified that it did not delve into the merits of the parties' contentions and reserved all rights and contentions for future proceedings. The challenge to Notification No. 9 of 2023 regarding the initial extension of time was left open for further consideration.Conclusion:The petition was disposed of with the direction for the petitioner to respond to the Show Cause Notice within the specified timeline, and for the Proper Officer to re-adjudicate the matter after a personal hearing, maintaining adherence to the statutory provisions of the Act.