TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the order confirming demand under section 73 of the Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 was liable to be set aside for being unreasoned and whether the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication after granting a personal hearing.
Analysis: The impugned order merely rejected the reply as unsatisfactory and did not disclose consideration of the petitioner's contentions, including the plea that the suppliers had filed returns reflecting tax payment and that retrospective cancellation of their registrations did not, by itself, establish non-payment of tax. The record also showed that no personal hearing had been selected, and the petition raised the grievance that the system did not permit selection of that option. An adjudicatory order under the GST regime must reflect consideration of the defence taken before confirming demand, and the absence of such consideration rendered the order unsustainable. The respondents fairly stated that similar orders had already been remanded in other matters.
Conclusion: The order confirming the demand was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Adjudicating Authority for reconsideration afresh after affording the petitioner an opportunity of personal hearing.
TaxTMI 
