Page 218 - GSTL_2nd July 2020 _Vol 38_Part 1

136 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 38
justice. The reason/evidence would act as live link between the
mind of assessing authority and the resultant conclusion arrived at.
In the impugned orders, it is an apparent failure on the part of the
AA that he has not recorded any reason or basis in estimating the
quantum of the outward taxable supplies. It is also clear from the
findings that the AA has not discussed anything about the appel-
lant’s contentions and not recorded any reasons. In this connection,
it needs to be emphasized that every litigant, who approaches the
AA for relief is entitled to know the reason for acceptance or rejec-
tion of his prayer, particularly when either of the parties to the list
has a right of further appeal. Unless the litigant is made aware of
the reasons which weighed with the AA in denying him the relief
prayed for, the remedy of appeal will not be meaningful. It is that
reasoning, which can be subjected to examination at the higher fo-
rums.
The appellant also averred before me that except presuming sales
suppression basing on routine wild guess work, the AA has never
attempted to verify transactions/payments of anyone connected
with the determined sales suppressions in issue, the same clearly
points towards a conclusion that the estimates of sales suppression
are pure guess work, and not based on any authenti-
cate/dependable evidence and/details.
The appellant has submitted a detailed statement and copies of the
returns in Form GSTR-1 filed by it and asserted that the turnovers
and taxes shown in this statement are actually scored outward sup-
plies. Since, the returns in Form GSTR-1 filed by it are found to be
not rejectable due to lack of any additional contra evidence, hence
the turnover & tax liability disclosed through these GSTR-1 returns,
is to be confirmed as the real turnovers of the appellant.
It is also an anomaly in the AA’s determination, wherein the AA
stated that he has added 50% to the declared turnover of the appel-
lant. But, the thorough examination of the said GSTR-1 returns of
the appellant, it is revealed that the AA’s computations on this as-
pect even after adding 50% are observed to be erroneous.
The common best judgement assessment, penalty and interest or-
ders are passed in a single order called Form GST ASMT 13 under
Section 62 of the AP GST Act, 1917 read with Rule 61(1) and Rule
100 (1) of the AP GST Rules, 2017. The turnovers of the dealer are
estimated under Section 62 of the Act only on the ground that the
dealer has not filed the return in Form GSTR-3B. The said estimates
of the turnovers are based either on the return in Form GSTR-3B for
the previous tax periods or the details of the outward supplies
made by the dealer reported in Form GSTR-1 for the same
month/tax periods (mostly of the previous months). For such non-
filing of the Form GSTR-3B for the particular tax periods, the turno-
vers declared by the dealer for the previous periods of turnovers
declared towards its outwards supplies of goods and/or services in
Form GSTR-001 for that tax period is adopted, besides adding 50%
of such returned outward supplies/turnovers towards probable
suppressions uniformly in all the tax periods and the best judgment
GST LAW TIMES  2nd July 2020  218