Globeop Financial Services (India) Vs Deputy Commissioner of State Tax (Bombay High Court)
GST Adjudicating authority cannot just copy paste the content from Show cause, need to consider thoroughly all submission before reaching at conclusion- Bombay HC
Bombay High Court, in the case of Globeop Financial Services (India) Vs. Deputy Commissioner of State Tax, set aside an order dated February 24, 2025, which confirmed a GST demand of over Rs. 70.57 crore for the period of April 2020 to March 2021. The court found that the impugned order was vitiated by a “non-application of mind” by the adjudicating authority. The petitioner argued that the reasoning in the order was a verbatim copy of the statements in the show cause notice issued on November 28, 2024, and that their detailed replies from January 27, 2025, and February 6, 2025, were not properly considered.
The High Court meticulously compared the show cause notice and the impugned order, confirming that significant portions of the latter were indeed a “cut and paste exercise” from the former. The court emphasized that an adjudicating authority is obligated to independently apply its mind to all contentions raised by the assessee and provide reasoned decisions. Merely reproducing allegations from a show cause notice does not fulfill the requirement of “consideration” as mandated by Section 73(9) and Section 75(6) of the CGST Act, 2017. The court noted that “consider” implies a deliberate, attentive mental process, including examining or weighing the merits of the arguments and providing the basis of the decision. The failure to address the petitioner’s detailed submissions, including precedents and a Board Circular, further indicated a lack of proper consideration, rendering the order invalid.
