Tax Show Cause Notice Invalidated Due to Procedural Flaws, Authorities Directed to Ensure Proper Communication and Fair Hearing HC ruled in favor of petitioner, setting aside a tax show cause notice (SCN) under CGST Act. The court found procedural irregularities in SCN service, ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Tax Show Cause Notice Invalidated Due to Procedural Flaws, Authorities Directed to Ensure Proper Communication and Fair Hearing
HC ruled in favor of petitioner, setting aside a tax show cause notice (SCN) under CGST Act. The court found procedural irregularities in SCN service, specifically its placement in 'Additional Notices' category, which hindered effective communication. The matter was remanded to tax authorities with directions for petitioner to respond within two weeks and be given fair hearing.
Issues: Impugning order under Section 73 of CGST Act, Impugning Notification No. 9/2023-Central Tax, Claim of limitation on impugned SCN.
Analysis: The petitioner challenged an order passed under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, along with a notification extending the time limit for passing the order. The petitioner contended that the show cause notice was time-barred. The petitioner, a sole proprietor registered with GST Authorities, argued that the SCN was not easily accessible on the portal as it was categorized under 'Additional Notices and Orders' instead of 'Notices and Orders.'
The issue raised by the petitioner was supported by previous court decisions, including the ACE Cardiopathy Solutions case. The court cited a previous decision rejecting the argument that uploading a notice under 'Additional Notices' category was sufficient service under Section 169 of the CGST Act. The court noted the re-design of the GST portal to address this issue, although the impugned SCN was issued before the redesign. Consequently, the court allowed the petition, setting aside the impugned order and remanding the matter to the adjudicating authority for fresh consideration.
The court directed the petitioner to respond to the SCN within two weeks and mandated the adjudicating authority to consider the response and provide an opportunity for the petitioner to be heard. The petition was disposed of accordingly, with all pending applications also being resolved.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.