AO Can’t Hold That Reply of SCN Was Insufficient Without Examining Documents Submitted by Assessee | HC

Case Details: A. B. Traders v. Commissioner of Delhi Goods and Service Tax - [2024] 161 taxmann.com 260 (Delhi)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• • Sanjeev Sachdeva & Ravinder Dudeja, JJ.
  • Rajesh Mahna, Ramanand Roy, Mithlesh Kumar Tiwari, Mayank Kouts, Shiva Narang & Silky Wadhwa, Advs. for the Petitioner.
  • Rajiv Aggarwal, ASC & Ms Samridhi Vats, Adv. for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner was engaged in trading business. The department issued a show cause notice (SCN) proposing a demand and it filed a detailed reply. But the proper officer passed an order and recorded that the reply uploaded by the taxpayer was insufficient and unsatisfactory. It filed writ petition against the order and contended that the proper officer did not consider the reply submitted by the petitioner in full consideration.

High Court Held

The Honorable High Court noted that the impugned order did not specifically deal with the reply of the petitioner, however, the proper officer referred to certain judgments to hold that burden to prove admissibility of any input tax credit could not be shifted to tax authorities. The proper officer was required to examine documents submitted by the petitioner and then hold whether input tax credit was admissible or not. But, in the present case, the proper officer had not stated why such transactions were not acceptable. Therefore, it was held that the impugned order was to be set aside and matter was to be remitted to proper officer for re-adjudication.