Jupiter and Co. vs Deputy State Tax Officer

Mr. T.N.C. Kaushik, learned Additional Government Pleader, accepts notice for the respondent. He submits that the petitioner failed to produce evidence of having made payments during the VAT regime. The petitioner has placed on record three replies to the show cause notice. In these replies, the petitioner has explained the reasons for the mismatch by stating that Government Departments reflect transactions in GSTR 7 while deducting TDS and making payments. On examining the impugned order, it merely records that the reply is not accepted. Since the impugned order is completely unreasoned, it cannot be sustained. For the reasons set out above, the impugned order dated 30.04.2024 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the respondent for reconsideration. The respondent is also directed to provide a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, including a personal hearing, and thereafter issue a fresh order, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner argues that the lack of reasoning in the impugned order violates the principles of natural justice and deprives the petitioner of a fair opportunity to present their case adequately. The petitioner highlights that the explanation provided in the replies was detailed and specific, addressing the unique circumstances under which the transactions occurred. Despite this, the respondent dismissed the replies without providing any substantial reasons, reflecting an arbitrary and non-transparent decision-making process. The petitioner seeks relief from this Hon’ble Court to ensure that the adjudication process adheres to the principles of fairness, transparency, and reasoned decision-making. The petitioner prays for the issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction to quash the impugned order and to direct the respondent to reconsider the matter afresh, taking into account the detailed explanations and evidence provided by the petitioner. The petitioner also requests this Hon’ble Court to direct the respondent to adhere to the statutory provisions and guidelines governing the adjudication process, ensuring compliance with the principles of natural justice. Furthermore, the petitioner emphasizes the need for a personal hearing to be granted, allowing the petitioner to present their case in a comprehensive manner and to address any queries or concerns raised by the respondent. The petitioner submits that a fair and transparent adjudication process is crucial to upholding the rule of law and ensuring that justice is served. The petitioner also seeks any other relief deemed fit and proper by this Hon’ble Court in the interest of justice, emphasizing the importance of a reasoned and transparent decision-making process in tax adjudication matters. W.P. No. 14964 of 2024 is disposed of on the above terms without any order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed. The petitioner hopes that this Hon’ble Court’s intervention will ensure that the respondent takes into account all relevant facts and evidence, provides a fair opportunity to the petitioner to present their case, and issues a reasoned and transparent order that adheres to the principles of natural justice and fair play.

Download PDF:
Jupiter and Co.

For reference visit:
Madras High Court 

Read another case law:
GST Case Law