Case Details: Hoscar System (P.) Ltd. vs. Assistant Commissioner (ST) [2026] 184 taxmann.com 263 (Madras)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- C. Saravanan, J.
-
N. Viswanathan for the Petitioner.
-
T.N.C. Kaushik, Additional Government Pleader for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner, a registered taxpayer, faced retrospective cancellation of GST registration pursuant to issuance of a show cause notice (SCN). Subsequently, a SCN in Form GST DRC-01 was issued proposing the demand on account of alleged excess availment of ITC. In the absence of any reply from the petitioner, an order in Form GST DRC-07 was passed determining the liability and noting the non-response. It was contended that the impugned order failed to specify whether the alleged excess IGST ITC had been utilised or remained unutilized, and lacked a clear factual determination on this point, rendering it unsustainable. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court.
High Court Held
The High Court held that a valid demand under Section 16 read with Section 73 of the CGST Act requires a clear finding regarding the nature and utilisation of ITC. It was observed that the impugned order did not disclose whether the excess IGST ITC had been utilised, which is a material factor in determining liability. The Court further noted that the absence of a speaking order and the lack of specific factual findings vitiated the adjudication process. Accordingly, the impugned order was quashed, the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication on merits within a stipulated period, and all recovery proceedings were directed to remain in abeyance pending such de novo proceedings.
The post HC Quashes ITC Demand Order Lacking Findings on Utilisation appeared first on Taxmann Blog.
