Kirti Agarwal Vs Union of India And 2 Others (Allahabad High Court)
Allahabad High Court considered a writ petition challenging an adjudication order passed under Section 74 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and a subsequent order rejecting a rectification application under Section 161 of the Act. The petitioner sought quashing of both orders on the ground that the adjudicating authority failed to consider the reply to the show cause notice, the submissions made during the personal hearing, and the fact that the disputed Input Tax Credit (ITC) had already been paid.
The Court noted that the impugned adjudication order itself recorded that the petitioner’s authorised representative attended the personal hearing on 22.11.2024 and reiterated the written submissions. Despite this, while confirming the demand and imposing penalty, the adjudicating authority relied solely on the investigation findings relating to alleged fraudulent transactions and inadmissible ITC, without examining or dealing with the petitioner’s explanation that the mistake had been realised and rectified by payment of the disputed ITC amount.
After the adjudication order dated 20.01.2025 was passed, the petitioner filed a rectification application dated 22.04.2025 under Section 161 of the CGST Act, pointing out the non-consideration of the reply and the failure to account for the amount deposited. The rectification application was rejected by order dated 22.09.2025 on the reasoning that rectification is permissible only for errors apparent on the face of the record, that the adjudication order had attained finality, and that appropriation of any deposit was not part of the issues decided in the original order.
