Suhel Ahmed Vs Union of India (Gauhati High Court)
Gauhati High Court held that the Summary of the SCN issued in FORM GST DRC-01 does not substitute the proper SCN required under Section 73(1) of both the Central and State GST Acts. Accordingly, order set aside and writ petition is allowed.
Facts- The petitioner was issued a Summary of Show Cause dated 16.12.2023 in GST DRC-01 for the tax period from April 2018 – March 2019 along with an attachment as regards the determination of tax. It is the case of the petitioner that as there was no proper Show Cause Notice attached to the Summary of the Show Cause Notice dated 16.12.2023 in the portal, the petitioner did not submit any reply. Subsequent thereto, an order was passed on 16.04.2024 in GST DRC-07 and the reason assigned is that the assessee failed to make payment within 30 days of issue of notice. It is contended that the attachment as well as the Summary of the Order uploaded in GST DRC-01 and GST DRC-07 were not authenticated by any signature of the Proper Officer.
Conclusion- Held that the Summary of the SCN issued in FORM GST DRC-01 does not substitute the proper SCN required under Section 73(1) of both the Central and State GST Acts. A formal and duly authenticated SCN is mandatorily required to initiate proceedings under Section 73. The Statement of tax determination under Section 73(3), which is attached to the summary in the present case cannot be treated as a valid SCN. Therefore, initiating proceedings solely based on such a statement is not in conformity with law. It is further clarified that the SCN, the Statement, and the final Order under Section 73(9) must be issued and passed only by the Proper Officer, as defined under Section 2(91) of the Act, these documents must be properly authenticated in accordance with Rule 26(3) of the CGST Rules, 2017. The summaries issued in GST DRC-01, DRC-02, and DRC-07 are merely supplementary and cannot override or replace the requirement of issuing proper and authenticated primary documents.
