Gauhati High Court directs Revenue to produce documents to examine "reasons-to-believe" existence; Defers proceedings Gauhati HC directs Dy. Director, DGSTSTI, Guwahati Zonal Unit to produce the records relating to SCN issued to assessee proposing GST demand for

“perusal of the Court” in order to examine “whether “reasons to believe” exists or it is a mere pretence”, additionally, as an interim measure, directs R4 to defer the proceeding relating to SCN.

As per Department Assesse: (i) did not declare correct turnover in GSTR-3B (ii) had not paid tax on the machinery rental income (iii) had not paid GST on royalty paid to the Forest Department (iv) is liable to pay tax on mis-match of GSTR-2A with monthly ITC availed in GSTR-3B

Revenue contends the particulars of escapement of tax was disclosed to the assessee and he was not liable to disclose the materials which have given him the “reasons to believe”, which was his subjective satisfaction, based on cogent and reliable materials.

Assessee contended that in reply to the SCN, it had submitted books of accounts and records and also the matter of GST on mining lease and/or royalty paid to the State Government is the subject matter of decision by a larger Bench of the Supreme Court.

Assessee also contended that even after the demand of certain documents, the Revenue has not furnished the same and due to non-providing of documents, the assessee has been prevented from submitting an exhaustive show-cause reply.

HC observed that the demand of GST on the petitioner is not only based on levy of GST on mining lease and/or royalty paid to the State Government which is the subject matter of decision by a larger Bench of the Supreme Court of India, but the demand is also based on other claims.

Therefore, before issuance of notice in the matter, the Court is inclined to examine the records relating to show-cause notice for the purpose of examining whether “reasons to believe” exists or it is a mere pretence.

It is made clear that the records have been called only for the perusal of the Court and therefore, copies of any part of the record would not be made available to the petitioner.

As an interim measure and till the next date of listing, the respondent (Department) is directed to defer the proceeding. Title: Marjit Basumatary vs Union of India Court: Gauhati High Court Citation: WP(C)/2620/2023 Neutral Citation: GAHC010099222023 Dated: 07-Jun-2023