PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. COMPLIANCE

[Sadanand Bulbule]

1. Looking at the series of recent judgements rendered by the Hon’ble High Courts on daily basis besides the cylo of landmark binding rulings of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the tax payers are facing the consequences of the fragmentation of principles of natural justice by “some” authorities. This is so particularly while invoking the provisions of Section 29, 54, 73, 74, 83, 107, 122, 129 & 130 etc., of the GST Act. The object of Section 75[4] of the GST Act specifically mandates that, “an opportunity of hearing shall be granted where a request is received in writing from the person chargeable with tax or penalty, or where any adverse decision is contemplated against such person”. By the way, most of the adjudicating and penal decisions are adverse only for one or the other reasons. So the authorities are not expected to deny the opportunity of being heard to such persons.

2. Essentially the provisions of Section 75[4] are not at all debatable. Although there are umpteen numbers of historical judgements rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the High Courts and the CBIC Circulars to adhere to the principles of natural justice, they are not followed. In other words, “chalta hai” attitude to contempt the binding rulings of the Courts/CBIC has become a trend.  

3. This kind of mind-set is completely prejudicial and unfair treatment.  Time and again, the quasi-judicial decision becomes more stable, meaningful and purposeful only when the principles of natural justice as mandated under Section 75[4] are complied in true spirit. Otherwise the decision is stillborn.

4. The contraposition is, when the violation of the principles natural justice before initiating action under Section 29, 54, 73, 74, 83, 107, 122, 129 & 130 etc., of the Act are placed on records, ‘some’ authorities get frantic. The authorities cannot tinker the fundamental intent of the provisions of Section 75[4] of the Act.

5. In the case of violation of law by the taxpayers may be with malafide intent, a real threat to the revenue, there is effective mechanism under the Act to deal with tax evaders/tax evasion. Nothing can come in the way of invoking the stringent penal action against tax evasion. But at the same time, under the guise of purported tax evasion, the principles of natural justice mandated under Section 75[4] cannot be made to suffer and evaporate. In fact, if the principles of natural justice are followed in extremely volatile situations while dealing with tax evasion, the decision of the authorities would be stronger and sustainable than ever before. Unfortunately some authorities are refusing to accept the ratio of the binding rulings of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and it would potentially contravene Article 141 of the Constitution and run counter to the holding of the Apex Court in number of judgements.

6. No human being is perfect, much less tax payers in this complex business world. So it is better to be authentic than to pretend perfect and it is as hallucinatory as swinging on the rainbow. In fact, there is no need to be perfect, as it becomes impossible to grow. End of the day, if the authority does not talk & accept its flaws daringly, the wounds never get a chance to heal and then they need different therapy, so that the real wound becomes visible to prevent spreading of infection. That single chance to embrace vulnerability could be the most important decision in any professional career to give confidence to know one can face anything and rise above it.

7. Revenue is safer only when the principles of natural justice are complied. There is nothing to lose but to gain more. Otherwise it is fragile to stand the litmus test of law in the judicial forums. Qausi-judicial proceedings are born to lead and live with a positive note but not to crumble for its own weaknesses. My endeavour is, let it not happen. Ultimately the object of the principles of natural justice must win to render justice to those who deserve it. In that eventuality, it is not the victory of the right decision alone, but the joy of the victory of the right decision is more ecstatic. That moment will not come again. So let the process of right decision be a never ending celebration.

8. It is vital for the authorities to reconsider these issues to begin uncontrolled to frame their decisions reliable and ensure impartial decision rather than only a pro-revenue approach. So the concerned authorities are appealed to take a positive call on this issue and to perform on par with the ratio of the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the High Court judgements in the best interest of quasi-judicial discipline, productivity and simplicity.