Additional evidence on supplier tax payment justified fresh consideration of GST adjudication and summary orders

Additional documents produced after the adjudication showed that the supplier had discharged the tax liability, and the earlier disclosure gap in GSTR-01 did not by itself resolve the entitlement issue. Because the petitioner could not place those supporting records before the adjudicating authority when the matter was first decided, the subsequent material was treated as relevant to whether tax had in fact been paid and whether the claimed benefit was available. The impugned adjudication and summary orders were set aside, and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration after taking the additional documents on record.

---

---

Issues: Whether the adjudication order and the consequential summary order under the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 should be set aside and the matter remitted for fresh consideration in view of the subsequent production of documents showing that the supplier had discharged the tax liability.

Analysis: The dispute arose from supplies made by the petitioner's vendor, whose liability was stated to have been discharged, but the relevant disclosure was not reflected in GSTR-01. The petitioner was unable to place the supporting documents before the adjudicating authority at the relevant time because those documents came to light later. Since the newly produced material was relevant to determine whether the supplier had discharged tax and whether the petitioner was entitled to the benefit claimed, the matter required reconsideration by the adjudicating authorities.

Conclusion: The impugned orders were set aside and the matter was remitted to the authorities for fresh consideration after taking the additional documents on record.

---