15 Lines Extracted from 10-Page GST Reply: Madras HC Criticises Dept for Not Considering Reply Properly or Seeking Additional Documents [Read Order]

In a recent ruling, the Madras High Court criticised the GST ( Goods and Services tax ) department for not considering reply properly or seeking additional documents. The court observed that out of 10 paged GST replies, the department only noted the 15 lines.

The petitioner, Tvl.R.R Fire Solutions submitted that the impugned GST order, dated 13.01.2025, failed to address the explanations provided in the reply and was passed without due application of mind.

The petitioner contended that such selective extraction amounts to a violation of the principles of natural justice, as no substantial consideration was given to the contents of the reply.

Moreover, the department did not even request any additional documents or clarification before proceeding to pass the adverse order.

On the other hand, the Special Government Pleader representing the GST authorities argued that the reply was indeed considered but was found unsatisfactory, and that adequate opportunities had been provided to the petitioner.

The high court noted a serious procedural lapse. It held that the assessment order clearly failed to deal with the objections raised by the taxpayer in a reasoned manner. The Court stated that when a taxpayer submits a reply, it is incumbent upon the department to engage with the contents thoroughly and provide a reasoned response. If the reply is found inadequate or unclear, the department must call for additional documents or clarifications.

Justice Krishnan Ramasamy observed that “Normally, when an Assessee filed his reply, the respondent was supposed to have duly considered the same and elaborately discuss with regard to the objections raised therein. Thereafter, if it is necessary, the respondent shall direct/intimate to the petitioner to file additional documents for further clarification. However, in this case, the respondent had neither considered the reply in a proper manner nor sought for any additional documents from the petitioner. Therefore, this Court is of the consider the view that the respondent had committed a serious error while passing the impugned order.”

The bench noted that a mere extraction of 15 lines from a comprehensive 10-page response does not amount to proper consideration. It held that when a taxpayer submits a detailed reply, the assessing authority is expected to discuss the objections raised, and if needed, call for further documents or clarifications before concluding the proceedings.

Accordingly, the High Court set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the department for fresh consideration. It directed the respondent to properly evaluate the reply filed on 09.01.2025 and permitted the petitioner to submit additional documents or objections within three weeks from the date of receipt of the Court’s order.

Further, the Court instructed the GST authorities to issue a 14-day clear notice for a personal hearing, and thereafter pass a detailed and reasoned speaking order on merits, strictly in accordance with law. With these directions, the writ petition was disposed of.

Ms.Aparna Nandhakumar and Mr.C.Harsha Raj, SGP appeared for the petitioner and department respectively.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates