Enkebee Infratech India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner of State Tax And Ors. (Calcutta High Court)
Calcutta High Court Orders Re-evaluation of GST Discrepancies in Enkebee Infratech Case
The Calcutta High Court has partly allowed an intra-court appeal filed by Enkebee Infratech India Pvt. Ltd. against an order dated January 8, 2024, related to WPA 25121 of 2023. The court has set aside specific findings in an adjudication order dated July 27, 2023, and remanded the matter back to the adjudicating authority for a fresh decision. The dispute centers on four discrepancies identified by the tax department, as detailed in a tabulated format on page 9 of the adjudication order.
Initially, the writ petition filed by Enkebee Infratech, challenged the adjudication order. The learned Single Bench dismissed the petition, stating that the company should avail itself of the available appellate remedies. Aggrieved by this decision, Enkebee Infratech filed the intra-court appeal.
After hearing arguments from both sides and reviewing filed affidavits and documents, the Division Bench focused on four points of contention. These are listed as serial numbers 6, 7, 8, and 9 in the aforementioned table within the adjudication order.
Regarding serial numbers 6 and 7, the department alleged that Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) was taken and utilized in GSTR-9 returns. Enkebee Infratech countered that while the amount was indeed utilized, it was correctly reflected in their GSTR-9 filings, but not in GSTR-3B. The court noted that this aspect could be readily verified by the department through its own means and that further delay in resolving this issue would not serve the interests of revenue collection.
For serial numbers 8 and 9, the department raised concerns about differences in the taxable value of invoices. The department contended that the taxable value certified by the recipient was less than the value declared by Enkebee Infratech. In response, Enkebee Infratech’s advocate referenced GSTR-2A filings, which purportedly demonstrate the filing status of GSTR-3B by the respective recipients. The court agreed that the department could easily verify this information through its portal.
Given the nature of these discrepancies, which primarily involve verification of existing records and filings, the Calcutta High Court determined that a remand was appropriate. The court directed the adjudicating authority to re-examine the matter, specifically concerning the four disputed items. The authority is instructed to provide Enkebee Infratech’s authorized representative with an opportunity for a personal hearing. Furthermore, the adjudicating authority must thoroughly peruse all documents and records presented by Enkebee Infratech and conduct a complete verification of all details before reaching a fresh decision on these four issues, based on merit and in accordance with the law.
The court’s decision emphasizes the importance of accurate verification of GST-related data and the need for a fair hearing process. By remanding the case, the Calcutta High Court seeks to ensure that the final adjudication is based on a comprehensive and verified understanding of the facts, avoiding unnecessary delays and protecting the interests of both the revenue and the assessee. The judgment does not explicitly cite judicial precedents but implicitly adheres to principles of natural justice and fair procedure in administrative decision-making, ensuring that the assessee has an opportunity to present its case and that the decision-making process is transparent and based on verified facts.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
