2021 (12) TMI 472 - HC - GST

Levy of penalty erroneously - non-compliance of Rule 142(1A) of the CGST Rules 2017 - non-reasoned order - no personal hearing had been afforded to the Petitioner - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - Issue notice. Mr.Naushad Ahmed Khan learned standing counsel accepts notice on behalf of the Respondent. He prays for and is permitted to file a counter-affidavit within four weeks. Rejoinder-affidavit if any be filed before the next date of hearing. List on 09th May 2022.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to order of Sales Tax Officer Class II under CGST Act, violation of natural justice, non-compliance of CGST Rules.

Analysis:
The writ petition challenges the order passed by the Sales Tax Officer Class II under the CGST Act. The Petitioner seeks a direction to remand the matter to another competent officer for a fresh decision. The Petitioner alleges being penalized for suspicious transactions without proper reasoning or a fair hearing. It is contended that the impugned order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice as no personal hearing was granted, and the Show Cause Notice was not uploaded promptly, depriving the Petitioner of the opportunity to respond. The Respondent is accused of hastily concluding the proceedings without the Petitioner's participation.

The Petitioner's counsel argues that the impugned order is non-reasoned and contravenes the procedure established by law. It is asserted that there was a failure to comply with Rule 142(1A) of the CGST Rules, 2017. Notice has been issued to the Respondent, who has accepted it through the standing counsel. The Respondent is granted four weeks to file a counter-affidavit, with the Petitioner allowed to file a rejoinder-affidavit before the next hearing date. Pending further orders, a stay on the operation of the impugned order has been imposed.

The Court has allowed exemption subject to exceptions in certain applications and disposed of them accordingly. The matter is scheduled for listing on 9th May 2022. The judgment reflects a detailed consideration of the Petitioner's grievances regarding procedural irregularities, lack of reasoning, and violation of natural justice in the adjudication process under the CGST Act. The Court's intervention through stay orders and issuance of notices indicates a prima facie acceptance of the Petitioner's contentions, warranting a thorough examination of the matter in subsequent proceedings.