The ruling in brief
Where SCN and penalty proceedings were initiated against legal representative of deceased alleged to have fraudulently availed ITC and IGST refunds, in view of fact that section 93 permitted post-death determination of tax, interest and penalty liability accruing to extent of deceased's estate, investigation and recovery actions were jurisdictionally valid against legal heirs.
Where department, after assessee's death, proceeded against legal representative for tax penalty based on alleged fraudulent refunds by deceased, while provisions of section 93(1)(b) was challenged under Article 14 as arbitrary and denying defence, since liability was limited to estate of deceased, representative was not deemed to be a wrongdoer, particularly when effective hearing and appeal safeguards existed; thus, constitutional challenge to Section 93(1)(b) was untenable and was rejected.
Amount seized during search could not be retained indefinitely merely on alleged voluntary deposit; Department was required to establish lawful basis for retention/appropriation, furnish complete account of principal and FD interest, and release any amount lacking statutory basis with interest actually earned after reasoned adjudication
Provisions considered
Section 93, read with sections 73 and 74, of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017; Section 93 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Article 14 of Constitution of India, 1950; Section 67, read with sections 54, 56 and 79, of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
This summary is for general information and is not legal advice. Read the full decision and the applicable law before relying on it.