Future Generali INDIA Insurance Company Limited vs. Goods And Service Tax Officer (Gsto) Ward 203 & Anr.

Facts

The petitioner, Future Generali India Insurance Company Limited, challenged an order dated April 29, 2024, which disposed of a show cause notice dated December 9, 2023, and raised a demand of Rs. 11,50,530.00 against the petitioner. This order was passed under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner argued that they had filed detailed replies on January 9, 2024, and February 27, 2024, but the impugned order failed to consider these submissions and was a cryptic order. The show cause notice had raised grounds concerning declared output tax, outward supplies, excess ITC claims, ITC reversals, ITC on non-business and exempt supplies, and ITC claimed from cancelled dealers. The impugned order stated that the taxpayer's reply was not properly filed, despite opportunities provided.

Held

The Court held that the impugned order dated April 29, 2024, was not sustainable. The reasoning was that the Proper Officer had failed to consider the detailed replies and supporting documents submitted by the petitioner on January 9, 2024, and February 27, 2024. The observation in the order that the reply was "not properly replied/filed" without any justification indicated a lack of application of mind. The Court further noted that if the Proper Officer required further details, they should have specifically sought them from the petitioner, which did not happen. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned order and remitted the show cause notice to the Proper Officer for re-adjudication. The petitioner was granted 30 days to file a further reply, after which the Proper Officer was directed to re-adjudicate, provide a personal hearing, and pass a fresh speaking order within the period prescribed under Section 75(3) of the Act. The Court clarified that it had not commented on the merits of the contentions of either party, and all rights were reserved. The challenge to Notification No. 56 of 2023 regarding extension of time was left open.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned order dated April 29, 2024, passed under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, is sustainable in law, considering the petitioner's submissions? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the impugned order was unsustainable as it failed to consider their detailed replies dated January 9, 2024, and February 27, 2024, which addressed all grounds raised in the show cause notice with supporting documents. They contended that the order was cryptic and demonstrated a non-application of mind by the Proper Officer. The petitioner also argued that if further details were required, the Proper Officer should have sought them specifically, which was not done. Respondents' Contention: The respondents, represented by the Goods and Service Tax Officer (GSTO) Ward 203 and another, did not present any specific arguments against the petitioner's claim that the order was not properly adjudicated. The judgment notes that the respondents' counsel accepted notice and the petition was taken up for final disposal with the consent of parties.