Section 54 of the CGST Act, 2017— Refund — Order beyond the allegations in SCN - The petitioner sought quashing of the impugned Order dated 08.12.2021, whereby the Refund application filed by the Petitioner has been fully rejected. The petitioner inadvertently on account of a bonafide mistake, deposited an amount of IGST, CGST and SGST in its electronic cash ledger of RCM Registration instead of depositing it in the cash ledger of the FCM registration. The petitioner again deposited the same amount in the electronic cash ledger of the FCM registration. As there was double payment, the petitioner sought refund. The court observed that the notice in Form GST-RFD-08 dated 17th May, 2021 in its body did not disclose any reasons for inadmissibility of refund from the dropped down of the amount. Petitioner was not granted any personal hearing during the adjudication process. None of the grounds on which the OIO has been passed there is any allegation made in the SCN. It is settled principle of law that if an allegation or ground is not made at the time of issuance of show cause notice, the authority cannot go beyond the scope of show cause notice to create new ground at the later stage of adjudication. The impugned order of adjudication is bad in law for the reasons that it has been passed beyond the scope of show cause notice. It further transpires that even the order in appeal does not deliberate on this issue and simply confirmed the order in original.

Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court set aside the impugned SCN dated 17th May, 2021 and the consequent order in original dated 14.06.2021 and order in appeal dated 08.12.2021. However, the revenue is at liberty to issue a fresh SCN and proceed in accordance with law.