assign any sufficient reasons
Case Title | Shaurya & Co vs The State of Bihar & Others. |
Court | Patna High Court |
Honorable Judges | Justice Sanjay Karol & Justice S.Kumar |
Citation | 2022 (3) GSTPanacea 291 HC Patna CWJC No.17202 of 2021 |
Judgement Date | 21-March-2022 |
Council for Petitioner | Brisketu Sharan Pandey Abhishek Kumar Vijaya Kumar |
Council for Respondent | Vikash Kumar |
Section | Section 73 of the Act |
The Patna High Court bench of Chief Justice Sanjay Karol & Justice S.Kumar has held that orders is bad in law. For two reasons- (a) violation of principles of natural justice, i.e. Fair opportunity of hearing. No sufficient time was afforded to the petitioner to represent his case; (b) order passed ex parte in nature, does not assign any sufficient reasons even decipherable from the record, as to how the officer could determine the amount due and payable by the assessee. Court dispose of the present writ petition quash and set aside the impugned orders. The Assessing Authority shall pass a fresh order.
FACTS OF THE CASE
Impugned order dated 17.08.2021 (Annexure P/4) bearing Memo No. 1075, passed by the Respondent No. 3, namely, the Additional Commissioner of State Tax (Appeals), West Division, Patna, in Appeal No. (ARN) AD1002210043795
And summary of demand dated 25.08.2021 (Annexure P/5), in Form GST APL-04, the appeal of the petitioner against the assessment order dated 30.12.2020, passed by Respondent No. 5, namely, the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Gandhi Maidan Jurisdiction, Gandhi Maidan, Patna West, Bihar, in GSTIN 10AJWPJ7870Q2ZA, under Section 73 of BGST Act, 2017;
And summary of order dated 30.12.2020 in Form GST DRC-07 for the tax period Apr 2018 to March, 2019 (Reference No. ZD1012200297606), has been rejected by a cryptic, misconceived and non-speaking order
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though notices have not been dealt with at all nor any reasons assigned in the order which though runs into 6 pages signed while determining the liability payable by the petitioner.
assign any sufficient reasons
COURT HELD
Considering the facts as recorded, held that notwithstanding the statutory remedy, is not precluded from interfering where, ex facie, court form an opinion that the orders is bad in law. This court say so, for two reasons- (a) violation of principles of natural justice, i.e. Fair opportunity of hearing. No sufficient time was afforded to the petitioner to represent his case; (b) order passed ex parte in nature, does not assign any sufficient reasons even decipherable from the record, as to how the officer could determine the amount due and payable by the assessee.
The order, ex parte in nature, passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, entails civil consequences. As such, on this short ground alone, court dispose of the present writ petition quash and set aside the impugned orders.
The Assessing Authority shall pass a fresh order only after affording adequate opportunity to all concerned, including the writ petitioner.
assign any sufficient reasons
ANALYSIS OF THE JUDGEMENT
Court are of the considered view that this Court, notwithstanding the statutory remedy, is not precluded from interfering where, ex facie, we form an opinion that the order is bad in law. Court quash and set aside the impugned order.
We accept the statement of the petitioner that ten per cent of the total amount, being condition prerequisite for hearing of the appeal, already stands deposited. Further the petitioner undertakes to additionally deposit thirty per cent of the amount of the demand raised before the Assessing Officer.
We also direct for de-freezing/de-attaching of the bank account(s) of the writ-petitioner, if attached in reference to the proceedings,
The Assessing Authority shall decide the case on merits after complying with the principles of natural justice.
Download PDF:
For Reference Visit: