TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 671X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot of the matter and vitiates the entire proceeding and violates principles of natural justice. The law is now no more res integra that the show cause notice under Section 73/74 is mandatory in nature. Leaving the question open that whether an Assessee can invoke jurisdiction under Section 108 of the JGST Act or not , it is held that the summary of orders, adjudication orders and all subsequent orders issued by the department in all the writ applications is bad in law, inasmuch as, the same has been issued without issuance of any Show Cause Notice and without affording the opportunity of personal hearing which is mandatory and without passing any detailed order in terms of the provisions of the Act. The summary of SCN and orders are quashed and set aside - All these matters are remitted back to the concerned respondents to pass afresh order in accordance with law and specific provision as enshrined under JGST Act, 2017 after following principles of natural justice - application allowed. - W.P.(T) No. 745 of 2021 - - - Dated:- 14-9-2022 - W.P.(T) No. 745 of 2021 W.P.(T) No.27 of 2021 W.P.(T) No.28 of 2021 W.P.(T) No.29 of 2021 W.P.(T) No.37 of 2021 W.P.(T) No.41 of 2021 W ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r, Jharkhand State Goods Service Tax, The Deputy Commissioner, State Taxes, The Deputy Commissioner of State Taxes Sidhi Vinayak Metal and Salt Company Private Limited. Versus The State of Jharkhand, The Commissioner, Jharkhand State Goods Service Tax, The Deputy Commissioner, State Taxes, Commercial Taxes, The Deputy Commissioner, State Taxes Hon ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh And Hon ble Mr. Justice Deepak Roshan For the Petitioner : M/s. Kartik Kurmy, Nitin Kr. Pasari, Advs. Ms. Sidhi Jalan, Adv. (in all the cases) For the Respondents : Mr. Sachin Kumar, A.A.G.-II Mr. Ashok Kr. Yadav, Sr. S.C.-I Mr. Amit Kumar, Adv. (for CGST) ORDER Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Since in all these writ applications common issue is involved; as such all are being heard together and disposed of by this common order. 3. The petitioners in all these writ applications have challenged the respective summary of SCN issued under Rule 142 of the JGST Rules, respective adjudication orders and all consequential orders and also the entire adjudication proceedings. 4. Initially the petitioners of respective writ applications have challenged the respecti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r s bank in Form GST DRC 13 for payment of the demand amount lying in the credit of the petitioner s bank account. The details of notices issued by the Revenue in case of respective petitioners is enumerated herein below: Case Number Tax Period DRC-01 DRC-02 DRC-07 DRC-13 Adjudication Order/penalty order 1 W.P.(T) No. 745 of 2021 Sep 2018- Nov-2018. June 2019- June 2019 March 2019-March 2019 06.01.2020 06.01.2020 26.06.2020, 26.06.2020 27.07.2020 08.01.2021 25.08.2022 2 W.P.(T) No. 27 of 2021 July 2017- Jan-2018 01.09.2018 01.09.2018 16.11.2018 ------ 12.11.2008 3 W.P.(T) No. 28 of 2021 July 2017- Jan-2018 01.09.2018 01.09.2018 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gh primarily they argued that the Assessee can invoke jurisdiction of revisional authority under Section 108 of JGST Act, 2017 by way of furnishing information in the Form of application that the decision or order impugned is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of revenue and illegal and improper and has not taken into account of certain material facts, however, during course of the proceedings; Mr. Kurmi submits that leaving the question open that whether an Assessee can invoke jurisdiction under Section 108 of the JGST Act or not the petitioners seek to press the challenge on the alternative grounds that the entire summary of orders/ DRC-07 has been issued without following principles of natural justice as well as the provisions of law as enshrined in JGST Act and Rules. The subsequent argument of the petitioners can be summarized in following manner: - (i) No show cause notices has been issued under Section 74 of the JGST Act. Only DRC-01/DRC-02 issued under Rule 142 of the JGST Rule/CGST Rule. DRC-1 is not a substitute of the show cause notice; (ii) DRC-01 is vague and lacks in details and is in violation of principles of natural justice. There is n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his Court by making the alternative prayer in the writ petition as against the orders which is not maintainable in the eyes of the law. It is evident from the statutory provision that only in order to avoid the payment of ten percent of the tax amount, being a precondition before filing the statutory appeal, the writ petitions have been preferred. 8. As a matter of fact, during course of proceedings, certified copy of original files were brought on record by the department pursuant to the order passed by this Court and it was found that in some cases only penalty order has been passed, in some cases no DRC-01 has been issued. In none of the cases show cause notices as per the provision of the Act has been issued. Though from record it appears that in few cases assessment order has been passed but it is not on record that whether the same has been served to the respective petitioners, inasmuch as, it is a specific case of the petitioners that assessment orders were never served to them. In crux, the procedure as required under the Act has not been followed at all and learned counsel for the respondents could not bring on record any such document which can satisfy that proper p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... anted which is in clear violation of Section 75(4) and 75(5) of the Act. In other words, principles of natural justice have not been complied. Reference in this regard may be made to the case of M/s. Godavari Commodities Ltd. Vs. The State of Jharkhand Ors,[W.P.(T) No. 3908 of 2020 with W.P.(T) No. 3909 of 2020] wherein this Court has held that opportunity of hearing is mandatory as per the Act itself. 10. In nut shell, demand of tax, interest and penalty has been confirmed without proper enquiry. Failure to issue the mandatory Show Cause Notices under Section 73/74 of the JGST Act along with summary Show Cause Notice under Rule 142(1) goes to the root of the matter and vitiates the entire proceeding and violates principles of natural justice. The law is now no more res integra that the show cause notice under Section 73/74 is mandatory in nature. Reference in this regard may be made to the case of M/s NKAS Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Jharkhand [W.P.(T) No.2444 of 2021] and in the case of M/s NKAS Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Jharkhand [W.P.(T) No.2659 of 2021]. 11. In view of the aforesaid discussions, leaving the question open that whether an Assessee can invoke ju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
