https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=802185 Section 75(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act requires a personal hearing when an adverse decision is contemplated; notices and written replies do not replace that right. An appellate review that merely adopts departmental figures without independently examining relevant records does not cure the breach. A return mismatch alone cannot sustain a demand based on alleged excess input tax credit. Section 155 places the burden of proving credit on the claimant, and the relevant books, invoices, returns and reverse-charge records require verification. Section 44 and Rule 80 do not provide for online alteration of a filed annual return; a bona fide error requires factual verification. Section 113(1) permits fresh adjudication after consideration of additional evidence. en-us Fri, 30 Oct 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Nov 2026 08:31:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=802185 Section 75(4) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act requires a personal hearing when an adverse decision is contemplated; notices and written replies do not replace that right. An appellate review that merely adopts departmental figures without independently examining relevant records does not cure the breach. A return mismatch alone cannot sustain a demand based on alleged excess input tax credit. Section 155 places the burden of proving credit on the claimant, and the relevant books, invoices, returns and reverse-charge records require verification. Section 44 and Rule 80 do not provide for online alteration of a filed annual return; a bona fide error requires factual verification. Section 113(1) permits fresh adjudication after consideration of additional evidence. Case-Laws GST Fri, 30 Oct 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=802185