The Proper Officer while passing the refund order of the appellant neither considered their defence submission/reply nor granted the opportunity of personal hearing. Therefore, in view of de-naturajuxta-pvopria-principia to natural justice, I find it proper to remand the matter with the direction to make necessary verification regarding the correctness of the averment of the appellant.
Section 16 of the IGST Act — Refund — The appellant, a manufacturer and exporter of Garments who is majorly into the exports of the goods/the supplier of zero-rated supplies. The appellant filed his refund for zero-rated supplies. He was issued SCN which was appearing on the Common Portal but he could not download the same. The appellant came to know that this SCN was issued to him as he did not furnish the DRC-03 as required in case where the refund is applied again after issuance of deficiency memo. The appellant on the same day i.e. 19-2-2020 filed a form DRC-03 and submitted the same with form RFD-09 requesting to release the refund. The jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner has passed the refund rejection order vide Order dated 26-2-2020. Being aggrieved with the impugned order, the appellant has filed appeal on 3-6-2020 on the ground that the SCN was not properly communicated in terms of the section 169 of the Act to the appellant, thus there cannot be any rejection on the basis of such SCN. The form DRC-03 was not considered and the amount was debited by the appellant. As an Adjudication authority is required to pass a speaking order taking into record all the facts and allegation of the case as per the SCN and the replies or submissions made by the assessee. The authority observed that the appellant neither received the Show cause notice in appropriate manner nor got the oppor¬tunity of being heard to put their submission before the proper officer.
Held that:- The Hon’ble authority remanded the case to the adjudicating authority for deciding the case afresh by following the principle of natural justice and for passing the speaking order in view of submission of appellant.
The Proper Officer while passing the refund order of the appellant neither considered their defence submission/reply nor granted the opportunity of personal hearing. Therefore, in view of de-naturajuxta-pvopria-principia to natural justice, I find it proper to remand the matter with the direction to make necessary verification regarding the correctness of the averment of the appellant.
Section 16 of the IGST Act — Refund — The appellant, a manufacturer and exporter of Garments who is majorly into the exports of the goods/the supplier of zero-rated supplies. The appellant filed his refund for zero-rated supplies. He was issued SCN which was appearing on the Common Portal but he could not download the same. The appellant came to know that this SCN was issued to him as he did not furnish the DRC-03 as required in case where the refund is applied again after issuance of deficiency memo. The appellant on the same day i.e. 19-2-2020 filed a form DRC-03 and submitted the same with form RFD-09 requesting to release the refund. The jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner has passed the refund rejection order vide Order dated 26-2-2020. Being aggrieved with the impugned order, the appellant has filed appeal on 3-6-2020 on the ground that the SCN was not properly communicated in terms of the section 169 of the Act to the appellant, thus there cannot be any rejection on the basis of such SCN. The form DRC-03 was not considered and the amount was debited by the appellant. As an Adjudication authority is required to pass a speaking order taking into record all the facts and allegation of the case as per the SCN and the replies or submissions made by the assessee. The authority observed that the appellant neither received the Show cause notice in appropriate manner nor got the oppor¬tunity of being heard to put their submission before the proper officer.
Held that:- The Hon’ble authority remanded the case to the adjudicating authority for deciding the case afresh by following the principle of natural justice and for passing the speaking order in view of submission of appellant.