The Delhi High Court asked to re-adjudicate post clubbing two SCN mandating GST on the Identical Tax Duration. It was ruled that post clubbing SCN, it will be re-adjudicated via one proper officer under the law.
The applicant Dinesh Kumar Varma, contested the order passed u/s 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, whereby an SCN (Show Case Notice) on 21.09.2023 issued via the Sales Tax Officer, Class-II has been adjudicated and a demand of Rs. 15,53,240 created against the petitioner.
The Applicant’s counsel furnished that the applicant was clueless about the SCN and could not file a response thereto. He proposed that the applicant has become aware of another order, whereby another SCN for the identical tax period i.e. July 2017 to March 2018 has been adjudicated, and a demand of the same amount was created against the applicant.
Read Also: Same GST Invoice Number on Multiple E-way Bill? Madras High Court Quashes an Assessment Order
A perusal of the order on 25.12.2023 passed to SCN on 21.09.2023 and the order dated 17.12.2023 passed on SCN on 24.09.2023 displays that both the SCN along with the orders related to the same tax period i.e. July 2017 to March 2018 and both orders have been passed via two different officers but of the same jurisdictional office i.e. AVATO, Ward-93, Zone-B, Delhi. Both the SCN create the same demand.
A division bench of Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav encountered that both the SCN and orders related to the identical tax period i.e. July 2017 to March 2018 asked for the same demand by two different officers of the identical jurisdiction.
The court while allowing the petition stated that the proceedings on the SCN on 21.09.2023 and 24.09.2023 are clubbed and shall be re-adjudicated by one proper officer as per the law.
The applicant will furnish a response to both the SCN within 30 days from today. Subsequently, the proper officer will adjudicate the notices within the duration specified under section 75(3) of the GST Act.
| Case Title | Dinesh Kumar Varma VS Sales Tax Officer Class |
| Citation | W.P.(C) 5487/2024 & CM APPL. 22593/2024 |
| Date | 22.04.2024 |
| For the Petitioner | Mr. Ajit Kumar Jha, Advocate |
| For the Respondent | Appearance not given |
| Delhi High Court | Read Order |
