Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Dept. Can’t Classify Product as Zarda Scented Tobacco After Repeatedly Approving It As Chewing Tobacco: CESTAT *  Mere Uploading Of GST Order On Portal Is Not “Valid” Service: Tripura HC *  CGST Can Proceed Even If SGST Closed Similar Case Earlier: Delhi HC *  SC upholds 28% GST on online gaming with retrospective effect. *  West Bengal Govt cuts E-way Bill Threshold limit to Rs. 50,000 for intra-state goods movement. *  Criminal Prosecution Under Central Excise Act Can’t Continue After CESTAT Sets Aside Duty Demand on Merits: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Madras High Court Quashes GST Assessment Orders for Denial of Personal Hearing; Remands Matter Subject to 10% Deposit *  Ex Parte GST Order: Madras High Court Directs Immediate Removal of Bank/ITC Attachment Upon 25% Deposit *  J.K. Cement Receives GST Demand Order of Rs 8,02,113/- from Ahmedabad Tax Authority *  Delhi Police EOW Busts Alleged Rs. 128 Crore GST Fake Invoice Network. *  REPLY TO SCN CAN’T BE TREATED AS “EMPTY FORMALITY”: ORISSA HIGH COURT QUASHES GST DEMAND OF RS. 57.30 LAKH *  Challenge to CGST Provisions restricting ITC to Bonafide Purchasers : Allahabad HC issues notice *  CBIC Notifies Revised Customs Tariff Values for Edible Oils, Gold, Silver, Brass Scrap and Areca Nuts *  Delhi HC Orders Removal of GST Attachment After Statutory 1 Year Period Expired *  GSTAT Extends Relaxed Appeal Filing Guidelines till December 31, 2026 *  AO fails to Provide Import - Export Data from DGFT to Taxpayer for Reconciliation *  Gold, Silver Imports To Get Costlier As Govt Raises Customs Duty To 10%  *  GSTAT Enables Pre-Payment Access to Document Upload and Checklist for GST Appeal Filing *  GST Portal Restrictions Can’t Override Statute: Gujarat HC Allows Cross-State Transfer Of CGST ITC After Amalgamation *  Centre Revises HS Codes for Large Diameter Steel Pipes Used in Oil & Gas Pipelines *  Customs Duty Liability Arises On Warehouse Clearance Date: Supreme Court *  Government lifts export ban on de-oiled rice bran *  CESTAT Grants 12% Interest on Pre-Deposit for Investigation from Date of Deposit till Refund and Denies Interest on Interest. *  Government Overhauls GST Classification Framework for Non-Alcoholic Beverages; Fruit Juice Drinks, Milk-Based Beverages and Caffeinated Drinks to Attract Revised 5% and 40% GST Rates from May 1, 2026 *  India’s gross GST collections hit a record Rs 2.42 lakh crore in April, up 8.7% *  Customs clearance stalled, revenue hit over MRP dispute *  Shipping Corporation explores Middle East routes as Hormuz tensions disrupt cargo movement *  India, Kenya signs MoU for exchange of pre-arrival customs information *  No demand of Taxes under Reverse Charge if Tax Already Discharged by Service Provider under forward charge *  The India-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement, signed "once-in-a-generation" deal that eliminates tariffs on 100% of Indian exports to New Zealand
Subject News *  Consignment Sales Can’t Be Reclassified as Inter-State Sales Based on Pre-Agreement Evidence: CESTAT *  Exporter Can’t Be Denied Advance Authorization Benefit Due To ICEGATE Technical Glitch: Delhi High Court *  No GST Demand For Mere Wrong Set-Off Of IGST Credit Under CGST And SGST Heads: Kerala HC. *  Cenvat Credit Can’t Be Denied on Input Services Having Nexus With Manufacturing Activities: CESTAT *  Pending Proceedings Can’t Survive Without Saving Clause: Calcutta High Court Quashes GST Demand of Rs. 6.28 Crore After Omission of Rule 96(10) *  Madras HC Quashes GST Demands on TASMAC (Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation) Bar Licence Fee *  GST Proceedings Cannot Survive Omitted Rule Without Saving Clause: Calcutta HC *  Provisional Release Can’t Be Denied Solely On Dept. Suspicion Of Misclassification And Undervaluation Of Imported Goods: CESTAT *  Businesses Should Not Be Kept Outside GST Regime Without Due Process: Gauhati High Court *  Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Reconsideration of Contractors’ Claim for Additional GST Payment After Tax Rate Hike From 12% to 18% *  S. 108 Statements Can’t Be Sole Basis Without Following Section 138B Procedure: CESTAT *  Bombay High Court Frames Key Questions on Mandatory Distribution of ITC U/s 20 CGST Act *  Filing of Annexure-B for Refund Applications involving Accumulated ITC using the offline utility in GST portal: GSTN *  No Service Tax on Parent Company’s Un-Invoiced Cost Allocations Without Actual Service or Consideration: CESTAT  *  Calcutta High Court Upholds GST Classification of Polypropylene Leno Bags as Plastic Products *  DRC-01 Summary Can’t Replace Mandatory SCN: Gauhati High Court *  GSTAT Issues Major Bench Allocation Framework; All Appeals to First Go Before Division Bench *  ITC Blocking Without Reasoned Order Violates Rule 86A; Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Release of Credit *  Allahabad HC Refuses Bail to CGST Superintendent In Rs. 70 Lakh Bribery Case *  S.130 Can’t Be Invoked Without Prior Tax Determination U/s 73/74: Allahabad High Court Quashes GST Confiscation Proceedings *  SC grants Bail to Rs 54cr GST case  *  Karnataka HC Sets Aside Duplicate GST Orders, Orders Fresh Hearing on GSTIN Cancellation *  DRC-01 Summary Can’t Replace Mandatory SCN: Gauhati High Court *  Transfer Of Unutilized ITC After Amalgamation - Supreme Court Issues Notice *  PUNJAB & HARYANA HC QUASHES GST CANCELLATION NOTICE FOR FAILURE TO PROVIDE CBIC ENQUIRY REPORT *  LICENSE FEE, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CHARGES NOT INCLUDIBLE IN CUSTOMS VALUE UNLESS THEY ARE A CONDITION OF SALE: CESTAT *  DELHI HC ORDERS REMOVAL OF GST ATTACHMENT AFTER STATUTORY 1 YEAR PERIOD EXPIRED *  CUSTOMS BROKER CAN’T BE FAULTED JUST BECAUSE EXPORTER’S GST REGISTRATION WAS PREVIOUSLY CANCELLED: CESTAT   *  Supreme Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Delhi HC Ruling Holding Real Operator Behind Fake GST Firms Liable As ‘Taxable Person  *  GST Appeal Can’t Be Rejected Merely Because DRC-07 Was Not Uploaded On Portal: Bombay High Court  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

GST UPDATE No. 108 ON RIGHT TO CROSS EXAMINE BEFORE SCN REPLY

GST UPDATE No. 108 ON RIGHT TO CROSS EXAMINE BEFORE SCN REPLY
It is a settled principle of law that assessee has the right to test the veracity of evidences used against him including the statements relied upon in the show cause notice. However, what is important is the time of exercising the said right by the assessee. The assessee has right to cross-examine the witness or persons whose statements are being used in the proceedings initiated against him. However, the question arises is whether the assessee can seek cross examination of the persons even prior to filing reply to the show cause notice issued to them. This issue was recently examined in detail by the hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PRAKASH RAGHUNATH AUTADE VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA &B ANOTHER [WRIT PETITION NO. 5753 OF 2021]. The analysis of this decision is the subject matter of discussion of our present update. The petitioner contended that the right to cross examine should be provided beforehand and relied upon the decision given by the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of G-TECH INDUSTRIES VERSUS UNION OF INDIA reported as [2016 (339) E.L.T. 209 (P & H)] wherein the provisions of section 9D were analyzed and the request of cross examination was accepted. The counsel for the department submitted that the request for crossexamination of the witness was premature as the petitioner had not even filed reply to the show cause notice. It was held that the request for crossexamination of the witness would be examined after the petitioner files his reply, in the light of facts and circumstances of the case. Reliance was placed on the decision given by the hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of KANPUR CIGARETTES LTD. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA [2016 (344) E.L.T. 82 (ALL.)] and COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, MEERUT-I VERSUS PARMARTH IRON PVT. LTD. [2010 (260) E.L.T. 514 (ALL.)]. The hon’ble Bombay High Court conceded with the view taken by Allahabad High Court as cited by revenue department wherein it was held that opportunity for cross examination can be given only after reply has been filed and the adjudicating authority seeks to place reliance on the statements as evidence. It was held that show cause notice is only a step in the process of adjudication and there is no adjudication at the stage of show cause notice. The show cause notice itself is not an order of assessment and so the assessee being entitled to cross examination, even before adjudication has commenced would not arise. It was held that the exercise of cross examination commences only after the proceedings for adjudication have commenced and not available before the reply to show cause notice has been filed. Therefore, petition was disposed of by directing the petitioner to file reply to the show cause notice and for adjudication of the case as per procedure prescribed in law after providing reasonable opportunity to cross examine witness if his statement is found as relevant and is relied upon during the course of adjudication. There are numerous favourable decisions rendered by the courts regarding allowing the assessee to cross examine the witnesses but it has been largely opined by various High Courts that this exercise of cross examination is available only after submission of reply and after adjudication of the show cause notice when the statements are considered as significantly relevant by the adjudicating authority. Similar view was taken by Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of MULCHAND M. ZAVERI V/S UNION OF INDIA wherein it was held that stand of petitioner to allow cross examination before filing reply of Show Cause Notice, cannot be accepted. Thus, it is crystal clear that the assessee cannot demand his right of cross examination before replying to show cause notice. He can demand his right while replying to the said notice or after adjudication of the case because every statement recorded during the preliminary stage of investigation may not be found to be relevant for the purpose of adjudication of the case.
Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com