Revenue authority raise demand
|
Case Title |
Pawan Kumar Singh Vs Commissioner , Deputy Commissioner of JGST, Godda & Dumka, Godda |
|
Court |
Jharkhand High Court |
|
Honorable Judges |
Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice Deepak Roshan |
|
Citation |
2022 (7) GSTPanacea 217 HC Jharkhand W.P. (T) No 1239,1261 & 1263 of 2022. |
|
Judgement Date |
11- July -2022 |
|
Council for Petitioner |
Mr Deepak Kr. Sinha Ms Rakhi Sharma |
|
Council for Respondents |
Mr Ashok Kr. Yadav [W.P. (T) No 1239 & 1261] Mr P.A.S.Pati [W.P. (T) No 1263] |
|
Sections |
73(1) & 73(9) |
|
Decision |
In the favour of assesee |
The Jharkhand High Court bench of Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh and Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary held that authority can’t demand for any amount of tax, interest, penalty, etc arbitrarily without compliance of statutory provisions of the GST Act and principle of natural justice.
FACTS OF THE CASE
Petitioner in W.P. (T) No. 1239 is Pawan Kumar Singh is a registered dealer engaged in business of Civil Construction, Petitioner in W.P. (T) No. 1261 is Narendra Kumar Narayan proprietor of M/s Om Enterprises a registered dealer engaged in business of Civil Construction Petitioner in W.P. (T) No. 1263 is Md. Minhaj Alam proprietor of M/s Sangit Electronics a registered dealer running business of sale of electronic goods. A common cause of clubbing these petitions being orders based on summary of SCN issue by the respondent u/s 73(1) in Form GST DRC 01 instead of a proper SCN which the Hon Court objected and did not upheld in the case of M/s NKAS services Pvt. Ltd. Vs The state of Jharkhand & Ors in W.P.(T) No. 2659 of 2021 on dated 09.02.2022.
The SCN does not strike out the relevant particulars and does not enumerate the contravention which the petitioners are called upon to reply. In the present cases proceedings were initiated allegedly on account of mismatch in GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A furnished and that the petitioners have taken undue ITC to which they were not entitled. Petitioners challenged summary of order in Form GST DRC-07 imposing 100 % penalty u/s 73(9) of JGST Act,2017, which they contended that can be levied only u/s 74(9) of JGST Act,2017. Petitioners contended that no adjudication order had been uploaded and that proceedings suffer from serious violation of principle of natural justice and the procedure prescribed in law. Petitioner prayed to quash the impugned SCN & order and that the matter be remanded.
In counter affidavit filed by the respondents, plea of alternative remedy of appeal u/s 107 of JGST Act, 2017 was suggested. Respondent no 2 mentioned that GSTN portal provided for standard format in which only, notices can be issued. Respondent no 2 followed the procedure by mentioning the violations and charges on the petitioner i.e difference in GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A clearly. Counsel for Respondent submitted that in case impugned SCN’s and GST DRC-07 are quashed, liberty may be granted to revenue to initiate proceeding after proper service of SCN’s upon petitioners and that period of limitation to initiate fresh proceeding was yet to expire.
Revenue authority raise demand
COURT HELD
Considering the facts as recorded, court held show cause notice to the assesee to be contrary, vague, lack details and/or unintelligible. It reiterated that specific ingredients of allegations enumerated thereunder have to be clearly asserted in the notice so as to grant opportunity to assesee’s to explain and defend themselves as held in the case of M/s NKAS services Pvt. Ltd. Vs The state of Jharkhand & Ors in W.P.(T) No. 2659 of 2021 delivered on dated 09.02.2022. Hon. Court held that impugned SCN’s & summary orders in GST DRC-07 in all the writ petitions were not in accordance with the procedure prescribed in law and quashed and set aside on the ground of non-compliance of statutory provisions of the JGST Act. The matter was remitted back to the adjudicating authority for fresh SCN and fresh adjudication order.
Revenue authority raise demand
ANALYSIS OF THE JUDGEMENT
Petitioner has the right to defend himself if allegations in the show cause notice is specific and opportunity for say is granted to him. Adjudicating authority can’t demand for any amount of tax, interest, penalty, etc arbitrarily without compliance of statutory provisions of the GST Act and principle of natural justice.
Download Pdf:
For Reference Visit: