Scrutiny notice under GST may stand where it seeks explanation for fresh discrepancies and no prejudice is shown.

A writ court will not ordinarily interfere with a second scrutiny notice under the Jharkhand GST Act where it merely seeks an explanation for further discrepancies and the assessee still has an effective statutory opportunity to respond. The court found the later notice was not without basis, as it followed the assessee's reply to the earlier notice and identified additional issues requiring explanation. No present prejudice was shown, and the authority remained bound to consider the explanation in accordance with law. Interference in writ jurisdiction was therefore declined and the scrutiny process was allowed to continue.

---

---

Issues: Whether the second show-cause notice issued in the course of scrutiny of returns under the Jharkhand Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 called for interference in writ jurisdiction.

Analysis: The notice dated 05.07.2024 was issued after the petitioner had responded to the earlier notice and it pointed out further discrepancies requiring explanation. On a comparative assessment of the two notices, the Court found that the subsequent notice was not without basis and that no present prejudice was caused to the petitioner by directing it to respond. The petitioner was still at liberty to place its explanation before the authority, which was to consider the same in accordance with law under the statutory scrutiny mechanism.

Conclusion: Interference with the second notice was declined and the petitioner was directed to file its explanation before the authority.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition did not succeed on merits, and the scrutiny process was permitted to continue with the petitioner being given an opportunity to respond.

Ratio Decidendi: A writ court will not ordinarily interfere with a scrutiny notice that merely seeks an explanation of discrepancies where the assessee still has an effective opportunity to respond before the statutory authority.

---