M/S BOXCOWORLD LOGISTICS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS.Judgment by Delhi High Court
$~52
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 10.04.2024
+ W.P.(C) 4980/2024 & CM APPL. 21733/2024 (for stay)
[[[[[[
M/S BOXCOWORLD LOGISTICS INDIA PRIVATE
LIMITED …. Petitioner
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ….. Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Bimal Jain & Mr. Keshav Jatwani, Advocates
For the Respondents: Mr. Varun Chugh, Advocate for R-1.
Mr. Rajeev Aggarwal, ASC with Ms
Shaguftha Hameed & Ms. Samridhi Vats, Advocates for R-2 & 3.
CORAM:-
HON�BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
1. Learned counsel for petitioner seeks stay of the operation of impugned order dated 30.12.2023. He, however, submits that if the matter is remitted for reconsideration of the Show Cause Notice without prejudice to his rights and contentions, he would not press his stay application or the petition any further.
2. Petitioner impugns order dated 30.12.2023, whereby the impugned Show Cause Notice dated 25.09.2023, proposing a demand of Rs. 1,58,54,742.00 against the Petitioner has been disposed of and a demand including penalty has been raised against the Petitioner. The order has been passed under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
3. Learned counsel for respondents submits that they have no objection to the main writ petition being taken up for consideration today, therefore, with the consent of the parties, petition is taken up for final disposal today. Next date of 22.08.2024 is cancelled.
4. Learned counsel for Petitioner submits that Petitioner had filed a detailed reply dated 25.10.2023, however, the impugned order dated 30.12.2023 does not take into consideration the reply submitted by the Petitioner and is a cryptic order.
5. Perusal of the Show Cause Notice dated 25.09.2023 shows that the Department has given separate headings i.e., under declaration of output tax; excess claim of Input Tax Credit [�ITC�]; Scrutiny of ITC reversals; ITC to be reversed on non-business transaction and exempt supplies and under declaration of ineligible ITC. To the said Show Cause Notice, a detailed reply was furnished by the petitioner giving disclosures under each of the heads.
6. The impugned order, however, after recording the narration records that the reply uploaded by the taxpayer is incomplete, not duly supported by adequate documents, unclear and unsatisfactory. It states that �And whereas, the taxpayer had filed their objections/reply in DRC-06 and appeared personally. However, during the personal hearing, the taxpayer reiterated the contents of the reply filed in formDRC-06. On scrutiny of the same, it has been observed that the same is incomplete, not duly supported by adequate documents and unable to clarify the issue. Since, the reply filed is not clear and satisfactory, the demand of tax and interest conveyed via DRC-01 is confirmed.� The Proper Officer has opined that the reply is incomplete, not duly supported by adequate documents, not clear and unsatisfactory and unable to clarify the issue.
7. The observation in the impugned order dated 30.12.2023 is not sustainable for the reasons that the reply dated 25.10.2023 filed by the Petitioner is a detailed reply. Proper Officer had to at least consider the reply on merits and then form an opinion. He merely held that the reply is incomplete, not duly supported by adequate documents, not clear and unsatisfactory, which ex-facie shows that Proper Officer has not applied his mind to the reply submitted by the petitioner.
8. Further, if the Proper Officer was of the view that any further details were required, the same could have been specifically sought from the Petitioner. However, the record does not reflect that any such opportunity was given to the Petitioner to clarify its reply or furnish further documents/details.
9. In view of the above, the impugned order dated 30.12.2023 cannot be sustained, and the matter is liable to be remitted to the Proper Officer for re-adjudication. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 30.12.2023 is set aside and the matter is remitted to the Proper Officer for re-adjudication.
10. Petitioner shall file a reply to the Show Cause Notice within a period of 30 days from today. Thereafter, the Proper Officer shall re-adjudicate the Show Cause Notice after giving an opportunity of personal hearing and shall pass a fresh speaking order in accordance with law within the period prescribed under Section 75 (3) of the Act.
11. It is clarified that this Court has neither considered nor commented upon the merits of the contentions of either party. All rights and contentions of parties are reserved.
12. The challenge to Notification No. 9 of 2023 with regard to the initial extension of time is left open.
13. The next date of hearing 22.08.2024 is cancelled.
14. Petition is disposed of in the above terms.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
RAVINDER DUDEJA, J
APRIL 10, 2024/sk
W.P. (C) 4980/2024 Page 4 of 4