TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 1818
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re legal issues involved in appeal number 20/26 and 31/26 therefore these two appeal are also decided with appeal number 5/26 by this bench. 3. The common background, to the extent relevant for the present purposes, is that search proceedings under Section 67 of the GST Act were conducted on 10/11.02.2021 at the business premises connected with the appellants. Various books, registers, invoice books and other documents were seized during the course of the search. The nature and evidentiary effect of the material relied upon by the Department, however, differ in the three cases and are disputed by the respective appellants. On the basis of the investigation and the material collected thereunder, the Department initiated proceedings under Section 74 of the GST Act. FORM GST DRC-01A dated 02.2023 was issued, followed by FORM GST DRC-01 dated 13.04.2023. The appellants raised objections during the adjudication proceedings and, inter alia, sought identification and copies/inspection of the documents relied upon by the Department. According to the Department, the relied-upon documents substantially comprised records seized from the appellants' premises or otherwise furnished by them, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tiary basis of the proposed demands, together with the relied-upon documents, was made available to them. They also dispute that the detailed grounds and quantification communicated earlier with FORM GST DRC-01A could, by themselves, be treated as constituting the detailed contents of the subsequently issued show cause notices. 6. On merits, the appellants dispute the evidentiary foundation and quantification of the respective demands. In Appeal No. 05/RPR/2026, M/s Cheema Bricks & Traders disputes the treatment of entries in the seized site-wise registers as unaccounted taxable supplies and the extrapolation made therefrom. In Appeal No. 20/RPR/2026, M/s Cheema Trading Company disputes the reliance placed upon the seized invoice books and the consequential estimation/quantification of alleged unaccounted supplies. In Appeal No. 31/RPR/2026, M/s Cheema Local Carrier & Construction disputes the Department's case regarding an independent taxable transportation/GTA activity and the evidentiary material relied upon for that purpose. The appellants have also disputed, to the extent applicable to their respective transactions, the separate taxation of transportation/GTA activity. T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....06.2023. On merits, the respondent supports the respective inferences drawn from the seized and other material and the consequential computation of turnover/tax liability. It also supports, to the extent involved in the respective cases, the separate demand relating to transportation/GTA services and the circumstances relied upon by the adjudicating authorities in that regard. The respondent maintains that the material discovered during search and the alleged non-disclosure of the corresponding transactions/turnover justified invocation of Section 74 and the consequential levy of tax, interest and penalty. The respondent has also contested the appellants' reliance upon the proceedings before the High Court, contending that the orders passed therein related to interim/coercive measures and did not determine the present tax disputes on merits. On these grounds, the respondent seeks dismissal of the appeals and has relied upon judicial pronouncements in support of its submissions. 8. Oral submissions on behalf of the appellants Learned counsel for the appellants reiterated that, although portal-generated show cause notices dated 13.04.2023 were issued under Section 74, the de....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e same. It was submitted that the relied-upon material consisted substantially of documents seized from the appellants' own business premises or documents furnished by them and that opportunity for inspection had been afforded. 12. On merits, learned Authorised Representative submitted that the respective Orders-in-Original were founded upon the seized and other material and not upon mere assumptions or presumptions. He relied upon the appeal-specific records - including the site-wise registers in the case of M/s Cheema Bricks & Traders, the seized invoice books in the case of M/s Cheema Trading Company, and the material concerning the alleged transportation/GTA activity in the case of M/s Cheema Local Carrier & Construction - and submitted that the material established suppression/non-disclosure of taxable turnover or transactions, as the case may be. Learned Authorised Representative also supported the transportation/GTA components of the demands wherever involved and the inferences drawn by the respective adjudicating authorities from the material available on record. He submitted that the Orders-in-Original dated 23.06.2023 were reasoned orders based upon the seized document....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ial trend in all countries committed to rule of law and constitutional governance is in favour of reasoned decisions based on relevant facts. This is virtually the life blood of judicial decision making justifying the principle that reason is the soul of justice. 8. Judicial or even quasi-judicial opinions these days can be as different as the judges and authorities who deliver them. All these decisions serve one common purpose which is to demonstrate by reason that the relevant factors have been objectively considered. This is important for sustaining the litigants' faith in the justice delivery system. 9. Insistence on reason is a requirement for both judicial accountability and transparency. 10. If a Judge or a quasi-judicial authority is not candid enough about his/her decision-making process then it is impossible to know whether the person deciding is faithful to the doctrine of precedent or to principles of incrementalism. 11. Reasons in support of decisions must be cogent, clear and succinct. A pretence of reasons or `rubber-stamp reasons' is not to be equated with a valid decision-making process. 12. It cannot be doubted that tra....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....52;े समक्ष प्रस्तुत लिखित और मौखिक तर्क के साथ-साथ संलग्न दस्तावेजों को ध्यान से देखने के बाद अपील निर्धारण के लिए निम्न बिंदुओं पर विचार किया गया है:- - सहायक आयुक्त, राज्यकर, महासमुद वृत्त द्वारा पारित आदेश ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....52;ने में असमर्थ रहे हैं। समुचित अधिकारी द्वारा दिनांक 23.06.2023 को पारित आदेश विधि अनुकूल है। 8. अतः सहायक आयुक्त राज्य कर, महासमुद वृत्त द्वारा पारित आदेश डीआरसी-07 र्; क् 220623009297स्द्ध दिनांक 23.06.2023 की पुष्टि की जाती है। परिण....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... these grounds or the judicial precedents relied upon by the appellants. The appellate authority, in paragraph 7 of the impugned order, merely observed that the appellant had failed to produce satisfactory evidence in support of his objections and held that the order passed by the proper officer on 23.06.2023 is legal. Thereafter, in paragraph 8, the appellate authority simply confirmed the assessment order and rejected the appeal. What is particularly significant is that identical paragraphs and an identical conclusion have been recorded in all three appeals, without any independent consideration of the respective grounds raised therein. Thus, the impugned order is, in substance, a one-line order dealing with seven substantive grounds of appeal and approximately 70 judicial citations relied upon by the appellants. Such an order cannot be regarded as a reasoned and speaking order. The appellate authority was under a duty to consider each material ground raised by the appellants and to record reasons for accepting or rejecting the same. Mere reproduction of a conclusion, without consideration of the grounds of appeal and the authorities relied upon, amounts to a failure to exercise ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... findings of the trial Court. The first appeal is a valuable right of the parties and unless restricted by law, the whole case therein is open for re-hearing both on questions of fact and law. The judgment of the appellate Court must, therefore, reflect its conscious application of mind and record findings supported by reasons, on all the issues arising along with the contentions put-forth and pressed by the parties for decision of the appellate Court. Sitting as a court of appeal, it was the duty of the High Court to deal with all the issues and the evidence led by the parties before recording its findings. The first appeal is a valuable right and the parties have a right to be heard both on questions of law and on facts and the judgment in the first appeal must address itself to all the issues of law and fact and decide it by giving reasons in support of the findings. [Vide Santosh Hazari vs. Purushottam Tiwari, (2001) 3 SCC 179 = JT (2001) 2 SC 407 and Madhukar and Others vs. Sangram and Others, (2001) 4 SCC 756]. 5) In view of the above salutary principles, on-going through the impugned judgment, we feel that the High Court has failed to discharge the obligation placed....