Adjournment in GST SCN Hearings: Authorised Representatives to File Applications on Behalf of Taxpayers [Find Draft Format Here]

In the course of Goods and Services Tax (GST) adjudication, one recurring issue relates to adjournments in Show Cause Notice (SCN) proceedings. Taxpayers often rely on authorised representatives (ARs) such as Chartered Accountants, Cost Accountants, or Advocates to handle compliance and defend cases before the authorities. Applications for adjournment filed by such ARs have become common practice, raising questions about procedural safeguards, legal validity, and departmental discretion.

When a GST officer issues an SCN, the taxpayer is typically required to respond within a prescribed time frame and attend hearings. However, in many cases, the personal appearance of the taxpayer is impractical.

Departmental practice shows that adjudicating officers generally grant adjournments when sufficient cause is shown, such as requirement of additional time to prepare replies, non-availability of documents, or genuine health or travel constraints. The GST law and the principles of natural justice mandate that taxpayers be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Circulars issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) also stress that officers must exercise discretion fairly and not deny adjournments mechanically.

Nonetheless, misuse of adjournments has been flagged by the administration.

GST Manual – A Comprehensive Book on GST Law - Click here 

Repeated requests leading to prolonged delay in adjudication are discouraged. Rule 142(4) of the CGST Rules requires that proceedings be concluded within reasonable timelines. Courts have also cautioned that while adjournment should not be denied arbitrarily, excessive indulgence cannot be permitted to defeat revenue recovery.

In practical terms, a written adjournment application is filed by the authorised representative, citing reasons and enclosing supporting documents if necessary. The officer records the request on file, and either grants or rejects it through a written or electronic communication. Increasingly, adjournments are sought and processed via the GST portal, ensuring better documentation.

Litigation before High Courts shows that refusal to grant even a single adjournment, particularly where reasonable grounds exist, has often led to orders being set aside on grounds of violation of natural justice. On the other hand, adjournment applications filed merely to buy time without substantive justification have been rejected by courts.

In conclusion, adjournment applications by authorised representatives in GST SCN proceedings are a legitimate procedural tool. Their acceptance depends on balancing taxpayers’ right to a fair hearing with the tax department’s interest in timely adjudication. Legal representatives continue to play a crucial role in ensuring that the process remains both efficient and just.

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