2020 (11) TMI 147 - HC - GST

Validity of SCN - effective right to prefer an objection - HELD THAT - Since Ext.P10 is only a show cause notice against which the petitioner has an effective right to prefer an objection and get the matter adjudicated before the adjudicating authority an interference with the show cause notice at this stage even assuming that the contention is one regarding absence of jurisdiction is not warranted in these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Taking note of the said submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner while dismissing the Writ Petition in its challenge against Ext.P10 show cause notice I make it clear that the 1st respondent shall while passing orders in the proceedings initiated by Ext.P10 show cause notice consider the objections raised by the petitioner in Ext.P12 as also other objections raised at the time of hearing and the order to be passed by him shall reflect a consideration of those objections. Petition dismissed.

Summary

Issues involved:
Challenge against show cause notice under Section 74 of the GST Act; Jurisdictional aspects; Consideration of objections by the adjudicating authority; Time limit for passing orders.

Analysis:

1. Challenge against show cause notice under Section 74 of the GST Act:
The petitioner approached the High Court aggrieved by the show cause notice issued under Section 74 of the GST Act. The Court noted that the petitioner has the right to prefer an objection and have the matter adjudicated before the adjudicating authority. The Court held that interference with the show cause notice at this stage, even if the contention is regarding the absence of jurisdiction, is not warranted in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

2. Jurisdictional aspects:
In response to the show cause notice, the petitioner filed a detailed objection raising various contentions, including the propriety of issuing the notice and jurisdictional aspects. The Court directed that the adjudicating authority must consider these objections while passing orders on the proceedings initiated through the show cause notice. The order to be passed should reflect a consideration of all objections raised by the petitioner.

3. Consideration of objections by the adjudicating authority:
The Court emphasized that the adjudicating authority must consider all objections raised by the petitioner, including those in the detailed objection filed in response to the show cause notice. The authority was directed to pass orders within a time limit of two months from the date of receipt of the judgment, after hearing the petitioner. The petitioner was instructed to provide a copy of the judgment and the writ petition to the adjudicating authority for further action.

4. Time limit for passing orders:
The Court set a clear time limit of two months for the adjudicating authority to pass orders in the matter after considering all objections raised by the petitioner. This directive aimed to ensure a timely resolution of the issues raised in response to the show cause notice.

Overall, the judgment focused on upholding the petitioner's right to raise objections and have them considered by the adjudicating authority while emphasizing the procedural aspects and the need for timely resolution of the matter.