TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 914X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [ 2022 (7) TMI 814 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] for the respective two assessment years and those writ applications were partly allowed by this court and the respective impugned show cause notices, the adjudication orders and the summary of the order/demand notices in DRC-07 in the case of those petitioners were set aside and the matter was remitted back to the concerned authority/adjudicating officer to proceed with the matter in accordance with law vide order dated 21.06.2021. When the respondent-Department has duly accepted all the contentions of the petitioner and found the e-way bills and computer generated measurement slip to be correct and genuine documents and the sole reason for initiating the proceedings against this petitioner and passing of the impugned adjudication orders was due to his transaction with M/s Jai Jawan Kastha Bhandar and M/s. Priti Enterprises and when the cases of those assesses have been remanded to the adjudicating authority to pass fresh order in accordance with law; interest of justice demands that the case of this petitioner should also be remitted back to the adjudicating authority, inasmuch as, the sole cause of action does not survives. The ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he petitioner nor the documents relied upon has ever been supplied to the petitioner. Further, without any information/notice the respondent-Department suo moto blocked the credit ledger account of the petitioner and the petitioner was in receipt of DRC-01A being intimation of liability under section 74 (5) of JGST Act asking him to pay the amount to the tune of Rs. 1,35,40,420.60/- failing which SCN will be issued under section 74(1) of the JGST Act, and if the petitioner wished to file the written submissions, same can be filed by 12.03.2020. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner accordingly filed written submission alongwith all the documentary proof that the transactions have actually taken place and it is not a sham transaction. The respondent although dropped the proceeding under section 74(1) of the JGST Act, however, initiated proceedings under section 73(1) of the JGST Act and straightaway issued show cause notices, without issuing DRC-01A. From perusal of SCN, it is clear that all the submissions and documents produced therein being copy of invoices, e-way bills, measurement slips, proof regarding payment against good transport agency, etc. were duly verified and found genuine ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of Principles of Natural Justice. Learned counsel relied upon the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court delivered in the case of Ayaaubkhan Noorkhan Pathan Versus State of Maharashtra Ors., reported in (2013) 4 SCC 465 and submits that in a case where the respondents have relied upon the documents obtained during inspection in the premises of the Assessee on the basis of intelligence note the same should be given to the Assessee to enable them to properly answer to the charges pressed upon. Petitioner being the purchaser has duly discharged its liability and had paid the tax. It is not the case of respondent department that the petitioner has not discharged its liability under the provisions of GST Act. The intent of the legislation cannot be to punish the dealer acting in a bona fide manner. She further relied upon the judgment passed by this Court in the case of M/S Tarapore Company, Jamshedpur Versus State of Jharkhand Ors., being W.P.(T) No. 773 of 2018 and submits that in similar facts and circumstances, this Court has been pleased to quash the assessment order in following manner: we are satisfied due to bona fides on part of the Petitioner, no punitive ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat many tax payers under GST are though physically nonexistent but had filed GSTR-1 and allowed the other dealers to utilize the said ITC. The Head Quarter accordingly vide letter Va.Kr./GST Int. cell/122/2019-2247 dated 25.06.2019 sent the Intelligence Note No. 30 dated 13.06.2019 to the concerned field office. He further submits that based upon the aforesaid Intelligence Note No. 80 dated 13.06.2019, the State Taxes Joint commissioner, Dhanbad Division, Dhanbad directed the concerned officials to proceed and investigate in accordance with law. During investigation of the business premise of the petitioner, no material whatsoever was found available, even though as per the registration certificate of the petitioner under GST it was shown as dealer of Iron, Iron scrap etc. On demand of the records/documents related to the business carried out by the representative of the petitioner, only few documents i.e. few invoices and eway bills were produced. He further submits that through the said inspection report dated 11.07.2019 the petitioner was directed to produce all the requisite records on 17.07.2019; however, he did not turn up on 17.07.2019 before the authority. As such, s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... partment also blocked the credit ledger account of the petitioner and the petitioner was in receipt of DRC-01A being intimation of liability under section 74(5) of JGST Act asking him to pay the amount to the tune of Rs. 1,35,40,420.60/- failing which SCN will be issued under section 74(1) of the JGST Act. The petitioner duly filed written submission along with all the documentary proof that the transactions have actually taken place and it is not a sham transaction. however, during pendency of these applications, the credit ledger has been unblocked though the amount has been realized. The respondent although dropped the proceeding under section 74(1) of the JGST Act, however, initiated proceedings under section 73(1) of the JGST Act and straightaway issued show cause notices, without issuing DRC-01A under Section 73(5) of the Act. 8. At this stage, it pertinent to mention here that the respondent-Department has duly accepted all the contentions of the petitioner and also the documents produced by him being copy of invoices, e-way bills, measurement slips, proof regarding payment against good transport agency, etc. and after verification and re-verification found them to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assesses have been remanded to the adjudicating authority to pass fresh order in accordance with law; interest of justice demands that the case of this petitioner should also be remitted back to the adjudicating authority, inasmuch as, the sole cause of action does not survives. 12. Consequently, show cause notices, both dated 23.07.2020, (Annexure-3 in both applications) issued under section 73(1) and Rule 142(1) of the Jharkhand Goods and Services Taxes, (JGST) Act and also the adjudication orders, both dated 19.10.2020, issued under section 73(9) of the JGST Act and DRC-07, both dated 19.10.2020 (Annexure-4 4/1 respectively in both cases); are hereby quashed and set-aside. 13. It is made clear that we have not gone into the merits of the case, however, the respondents are directed to proceed in the matter from the stage of show cause notice after following principle of natural justice keeping in mind the ratio decided in the case of M/s. Tarapore Company, Jamshedpur Versus The State of Jharkhand being W.P.(T) No. 773 of 2018 and also in the case of D.Y.Beathel Enterprises Versus State Tax Officer (Data Cell), Tirunelveli, reported in [2021] 127 taxmann.com 80 (Madras ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
