Additional evidence in GST appeal must be considered where Rule 112 exceptions apply; blanket refusal cannot stand.

Additional evidence in a GST appeal cannot be rejected by a blanket reading of Rule 112(1) of the CGST Rules, 2017 where the rule itself permits receipt of evidence on recognised exceptions, including sufficient cause for earlier non-production or lack of adequate opportunity. The appellate authority was required to examine whether those exceptions applied before refusing the material. Because that exercise was not undertaken, the refusal was unsustainable. The appellate order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration of the appeal along with the additional evidence and other contentions.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the appellate authority was justified in refusing to consider additional evidence tendered by the assessee and whether the matter required remand for consideration of such evidence.

Issue (i): Whether the appellate authority was justified in refusing to consider additional evidence tendered by the assessee and whether the matter required remand for consideration of such evidence.

Analysis: Rule 112(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 restricts production of additional evidence in appeal, but expressly permits it in specified situations, including where the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from producing the evidence earlier, where relevant evidence could not be produced for sufficient cause, or where the proceedings were decided without adequate opportunity to adduce evidence. The appellate authority proceeded on the footing that no such evidence could be received, without examining whether the assessee's case fell within the statutory exceptions. Where the additional material requires examination, remand to the original authority or reconsideration by the appellate authority is an appropriate course.

Conclusion: The refusal to consider the additional evidence was unsustainable, and the matter was required to be remanded for fresh consideration of the appeal along with the additional evidence.

Final Conclusion: The impugned appellate order was set aside and the appeal was sent back for fresh decision after considering the additional evidence and other contentions within the time granted by the Court.

Ratio Decidendi: Additional evidence in tax appeal cannot be rejected by a blanket reading of the rule where the statute itself permits it to be received on recognized exceptions, and the appropriate course in such a case is reconsideration or remand for decision on merits.

---