In the case of “The Husband of the Proprietor” versus the relevant authorities, the petitioner challenges a Show Cause Notice issued under Sections 16(2)(c) and 17(5) of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner argues that the demand mentioned in the notice is unjustified and that a duplicate demand has been made under both provisions. Additionally, the petitioner criticizes the impugned order for being cryptic and devoid of reasoning.
Upon examination, the court finds merit in the petitioner’s arguments. The order in question lacks substantive details and merely states the necessity to proceed with the demands outlined in the Show Cause Notice. As a result, the court sets aside the impugned order and grants the petitioner an opportunity to respond to the Show Cause Notice within one week. Following the submission of the petitioner’s reply, the proper officer is directed to re-adjudicate the matter within four weeks, providing the petitioner with a chance for a personal hearing. It is emphasized that the proper officer must issue a comprehensive and reasoned order in this regard.
