Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2025 (6) TMI 1559 - HC - GSTChallenge to assessment order and assessment framed against the petitioner - typographical error in the return filed by the petitioner and petitioner inadvertently did not put in a decimal - ex-parte decision - impugned order does not reflect any reasons or findings recorded by the proper officer - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - The impugned order dated 20.01.2025 merely records that the show cause notice DRC-01A was issued on 10.12.2024 and till the passing of the order no reply had been uploaded on the Online Portal and since there is no reply an ex-parte decision is passed and assessment is framed under Section 74 of the Act. The impugned order does not reflect any reasons or findings recorded by the proper officer of fraud willful-misstatement or suppression of facts to evade tax. Consequently the impugned being bereft of any details or reasoning is not sustainable and is accordingly set aside. The matter is thus remitted to the proper officer to re-adjudicate the show cause in accordance with law - Petition disposed off by way of remand.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court, through Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva, set aside the assessment order dated 20.01.2025 passed under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, on the ground that the order was "bereft of any details or reasoning" and failed to record "any reasons or findings... of fraud, willful-misstatement or suppression of facts to evade tax," as required by Section 74(1). The petitioner had alleged a typographical error in the turnover declared, and the impugned order was passed ex-parte without considering the petitioner's pending reply. The Court remitted the matter to the proper officer for re-adjudication in accordance with law, granting the petitioner two weeks to file a response and directing that an opportunity of personal hearing be provided before passing a fresh order. The petition was disposed accordingly.
|