Pre-GST transaction consideration requires remand for fresh adjudication and a particularised reply within specified time.

Impugned Order-in-Original confirming tax, interest and equal penalties was set aside and remitted because the order failed to address material pleas that receipts related to pre-GST contracts, payments already made, and a subsequent assessment order affecting part of the demand. The court found absence of on merits consideration of pleaded pre GST transactions and inadequate particularisation in responses, and directed fresh adjudication. Petitioner must file a particularised reply treating the impugned order as an addendum to the show cause notice within thirty days; respondent must decide the matter on merits after hearing within three months, applying assessment reconciliation and procedural fairness.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned Order-in-Original No.Sl.No.03/2023-GST (JC) dated 28.03.2023 confirming demands, interest and penalties under CGST Act, 2017 and TNGST Act, 2017 should be set aside and the matter remitted for fresh adjudication in light of the petitioner's contentions regarding pre-GST transactions, payments made, and the subsequent assessment order passed by the State Authority dated 17.02.2025.

Analysis: The petition challenges the confirmation of tax, interest and equal penalties for alleged suppression of taxable turnover for periods overlapping the pre-GST era and post-GST receipts. The petitioner claims amounts received pertain to contracts executed prior to 01.07.2017 and relies on specific payments already made; further, the State Authority has passed an assessment order on 17.02.2025 affecting part of the demand. The Court examined the record, the petitioner's replies, and the State Authority's order and found that the impugned order does not fully account for the pleaded pre-GST nature of transactions, the detailed particulars and supporting annexures required, and the subsequent State Authority decision. In view of these material aspects not being addressed on merits in the impugned order, the Court concluded that a fresh adjudication is necessary. The Court directed the petitioner to file a proper, particularised reply treating the impugned order as an addendum to the show cause notice and directed the respondent to pass a final order on merits within three months, after hearing the petitioner.

Conclusion: The impugned Order-in-Original No.Sl.No.03/2023-GST (JC) dated 28.03.2023 is set aside and the matter is remitted to the respondent for fresh adjudication in accordance with the directions given; petitioner to file a particularised reply within thirty days and respondent to pass a final order on merits within three months.

---