https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443923 In a writ challenging an assessment premised on mismatch between GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B, the HC held that the discrepancy appeared linked to tax deducted at source reported by a third party in GSTR-7 and therefore required an explanation from the assessee. Applying principles of natural justice, the HC found the assessee was entitled to a fair opportunity to clarify the turnover variance noted in ASMT-10 before any adverse determination. The HC declined to relegate the assessee to the appellate remedy at this stage because the matter required proper primary consideration on merits. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remitted for a fresh merits order within three months. en-us Mon, 11 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Jan 2026 14:20:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443923 In a writ challenging an assessment premised on mismatch between GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B, the HC held that the discrepancy appeared linked to tax deducted at source reported by a third party in GSTR-7 and therefore required an explanation from the assessee. Applying principles of natural justice, the HC found the assessee was entitled to a fair opportunity to clarify the turnover variance noted in ASMT-10 before any adverse determination. The HC declined to relegate the assessee to the appellate remedy at this stage because the matter required proper primary consideration on merits. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remitted for a fresh merits order within three months. Case-Laws GST Mon, 11 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443923