GST show-cause notice challenge dismissed for bypassing mandatory written explanation and personal hearing remedies

Karnataka HC dismissed a writ petition challenging a GST show-cause notice regarding un-denatured Extra Neutral Alcohol. The petitioner sought to quash the notice without first submitting written explanation or seeking personal hearing as provided. The HC held the petition was not maintainable, citing Supreme Court precedent that discouraged approaching courts on show-cause notices without first utilizing available remedies. The court emphasized that grounds for challenge should have been raised in written explanation to enable proper consideration by the issuing authority.

---

---

Issues:
1. Challenge to Show Cause Notice for GST on Extra Neutral Alcohol (ENA)
2. Authority of Respondents to issue Show Cause Notice
3. Requirement of submitting written explanation before challenging Show Cause Notice
4. Maintainability of the writ petition

Analysis:
1. The petitioner approached the High Court seeking to quash a Show Cause Notice issued by respondent No. 1, demanding GST on un-denatured Extra Neutral Alcohol (ENA) supplied by the petitioner. The petitioner argued that ENA, being un-denatured spirit, is not covered under the relevant notification for GST. The petitioner sought relief through a writ of certiorari or prohibition to challenge the Notice.

2. The respondents contended that they had the authority under Central Government notification to levy GST and issue the Show Cause Notice. The petitioner failed to submit a written explanation in response to the Notice, as required under Section 50 of the GST Act. The respondents relied on legal provisions to justify the issuance of the Show Cause Notice.

3. The High Court emphasized the importance of submitting a written explanation before challenging a Show Cause Notice. The court noted that the petitioner did not provide any reasonable explanation for not submitting the required response. The court highlighted that the petitioner rushed to the court without availing the opportunity to present his case through a written explanation, which is essential for the competent authority to consider the defense.

4. In the judgment, the High Court referred to legal precedents, including a decision of the Apex Court, which discouraged challenging Show Cause Notices without first submitting a written explanation. The court held that the petitioner's failure to comply with the procedural requirement rendered the writ petition not maintainable. The court dismissed the petition, emphasizing the importance of following due process and exhausting available remedies before approaching the court.

---