Non-response to SCN & DRC01A construed as suppression: Madras HC

On a prima facie reading, the observation may appear justified. However, a proper reading of the definition as laid supra brings the following points to fore:

1. Suppression means non-declaration of facts or information required to be declared in the return, statement, report or any other document furnished under the GST law. Will reply to intimation / SCN tantamount to a return, statement or report? Certainly not. Then, will they be covered under the ambit of "any other document"? Perhaps not, by applying the principle of ejusdem generis.
2. Suppression also means failure to furnish any information on being asked for, in writing, by the proper officer. If we discount the so-called SCNs which seek information from the assessee for want of time or lack of knowledge, it is trite that SCN cannot be used to seek information.
3. While the term "suppression" is defined, most tend to overlook the suffix "to evade tax" attached to the said term under Section 74 ibid. That is, even if an assessee's act of not reporting certain facts or information in a return, etc. falls within the realm of "suppression" as defined in law, it must be done with an intent to evade tax. Thus, mere satisfaction of the term "suppression" is insufficient to invoke Section 74 ibid.

Therefore, it is difficult to fathom how not replying to DRC01A / SCN amounts to suppression. Interestingly, if SCN under Section 73 ibid is issued on a subject matter and the taxable person fails to respond, could that amount to "suppression"?