2024 (6) TMI 32 - HC - GST

Violation of principles of natural justice - opportunity of hearing not provided - impugned order had not considered the show-cause reply - Challenge to order passed u/s 73 of the Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 - HELD THAT - It is observed from the communication regarding attachment to determination of tax (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) that the concerned officer has not put the petitioner to notice that unless a prayer is made for personal hearing no personal hearing would be permitted. Therefore non-granting an opportunity for personal hearing is not found acceptable. Moreover even if the Assessing Officer had decided not to grant opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner yet he has a bounden duty to consider the show-cause reply which does not appear to have been done in this case. The Court is of the considered opinion that even at the motion stage this is a fit case for interfering with the impugned order dated 30.12.2023 passed under Section 73 of the Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 along with attachment to DRC 07 dated 30.12.2023 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax Barpeta Road-1 Guwahati Zone-B (respondent no. 3). Accordingly the said order is set aside and the matter is remanded back for a fresh decision by the same authority by fixing a date for giving personal hearing to the petitioner. Petition disposed off by way of remand.

Summary

Issues involved: Challenge to order u/s 73 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for financial year 2017-18 due to lack of consideration of show-cause reply and absence of opportunity for personal hearing.

Summary:
The petitioner challenged an order dated 30.12.2023 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of State Taxes, Barpeta Road-1, Guwahati Zone-B under Section 73 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, along with attachment to DRC 07 for the financial year 2017-18. The petitioner's grievance was that the assessing authority did not fix a date for hearing and failed to consider the show-cause reply submitted in response to a notice dated 30.09.2023.

The State GST standing counsel opposed the petition, stating that no prayer for personal hearing was made by the petitioner despite submitting a reply on 20.12.2023. The counsel argued that the Assessing Officer decided the matter without granting a personal hearing, and thus, interference with the impugned order was unwarranted.

The Court noted that the officer did not inform the petitioner that a personal hearing required a specific request and found the denial of an opportunity for personal hearing unacceptable. It emphasized that even if a personal hearing was not granted, the Assessing Officer should have considered the show-cause reply, which was not done in this case.

Consequently, the Court deemed it appropriate to set aside the order dated 30.12.2023 and remand the matter for a fresh decision by the same authority, directing the fixing of a date for a personal hearing for the petitioner. The respondents were granted liberty to seek modification of the order. The petitioner was instructed to provide a certified copy of the order to the respondent authorities, and the instruction produced by the State GST standing counsel was retained on record.