Fresh GST adjudication follows later documentary proof and an out-of-State advance ruling is not binding on West Bengal taxpayer.

Subsequent documentary material showing that GST liability under reverse charge had already been discharged justified reconsideration of the assessment on fresh facts. The appellate authority had only addressed the limited question of whether penalty fell under section 74 rather than section 73 of the West Bengal GST Act, 2017, without examining the taxpayer's other grounds. The Calcutta High Court treated the later declaration as material unavailable earlier and directed fresh adjudication. It also clarified that an Advance Ruling from Goa was not binding on a taxpayer registered in West Bengal and could not be applied automatically to the dispute.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessment and appellate orders were liable to be set aside and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication in view of subsequent documentary material, and whether the original authority could rely on an Advance Ruling rendered in another State.

Analysis: The appellate authority had interfered only on the limited question that penalty could not be imposed under Section 74 of the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and ought to have been considered under Section 73, but it did not examine the other grounds raised by the registered taxpayer. A subsequent declaration from Indian Oil Corporation Limited showed that GST liability under the reverse charge mechanism had been discharged for the relevant periods, and this material was not available earlier. The original authority was therefore required to reconsider the matter on the basis of the fresh material. The Advance Ruling rendered in Goa was held to be non-binding on a taxpayer registered in West Bengal and not automatically applicable to the present dispute.

Conclusion: The orders of the appellate authority and the original authority were set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication. The original authority was directed to proceed under Section 73 of the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and not under Section 74 of the West Bengal Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and not to rely on the Goa Advance Ruling.

Final Conclusion: The taxpayer obtained a remand for reconsideration on merits with directions to file a fresh reply and for the assessment to be decided afresh on the basis of the subsequent declaration and without being influenced by the earlier order or the out-of-State advance ruling.

Ratio Decidendi: A subsequent material document that was not available before the authorities can justify remand for fresh adjudication, and an advance ruling rendered in another State does not bind a third-party taxpayer outside its jurisdiction.

---