Tax Authority Order Invalidated: Comprehensive Review Mandated with Fair Hearing and Detailed Reconsideration of Taxpayer's Submissions

HC found the tax authority's order invalid due to inadequate consideration of the taxpayer's detailed reply. The court remitted the matter back to the proper officer, directing a comprehensive re-examination of the show cause notice, mandating specific communication of any additional document requirements, and ensuring a fair personal hearing before passing a fresh order within statutory timelines.

---

---

Issues:
Impugned order disposing of Show Cause Notice and raising a demand against the Petitioner under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017 without considering the detailed reply filed by the Petitioner.

Analysis:
The Petitioner challenged an order dated 28.12.2023 that disposed of a Show Cause Notice proposing a demand of Rs. 5,17,43,004.00 against the Petitioner under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Petitioner contended that despite filing a detailed reply on 23.10.2023, the impugned order did not consider the reply and was cryptic. The Show Cause Notice had detailed headings regarding Input Tax Credit, under-declaration of ineligible ITC, and ITC claimed from certain categories. The Petitioner had furnished a detailed reply under each heading, but the impugned order stated that the reply was unsatisfactory and lacked substantial documents. The Proper Officer opined that the taxpayer did not appear for a personal hearing and did not submit satisfactory documents, leading to the decision to create a demand. However, the Court found that the Proper Officer did not adequately consider the detailed reply submitted by the Petitioner. The Court held that if further details were required, they should have been specifically sought from the Petitioner, which was not done in this case.

The Court concluded that the impugned order was not sustainable as the Proper Officer did not properly consider the detailed reply submitted by the Petitioner. The matter was remitted to the Proper Officer for re-adjudication, directing the Officer to intimate the Petitioner about any required details or documents. The Petitioner was instructed to furnish the necessary explanation and documents, following which the Proper Officer would re-adjudicate the Show Cause Notice, provide a personal hearing, and pass a fresh order within the prescribed period under the Act. The Court clarified that it did not comment on the merits of the parties' contentions, and all rights and contentions were reserved. The challenge to Notification No. 9 of 2023 regarding the initial time extension was left open, and the petition was disposed of accordingly.

---