2021 (2) TMI 431 - HC - GST

Violation of principles of natural justice - petitioner submits that the second respondent without hearing the petitioner and without providing an opportunity has passed the impugned order which is in contravention of principles of natural justice - Assessment period is May-2019 - HELD THAT - From the perusal of the Annexure-B, the second respondent without providing an opportunity to the petitioner has passed the impugned order. Thus, impugned order passed by the second respondent is in contravention of principles of natural justice. Hence, the impugned orders deserves to be set aside only on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice. The matter is remitted to the second respondent to reconsider the appeal afresh after hearing the parties and pass appropriate order in accordance with law - Petition allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Violation of principles of natural justice in passing the impugned order without providing an opportunity to the petitioner.

Analysis:
The petitioner, an assessee, challenged an order requiring payment of a specified amount for the financial year 2019. The petitioner filed an appeal under Section 107(11) of the Karnataka GST Act, 2017, which was dismissed by the second respondent without granting an opportunity of hearing, thereby disregarding principles of natural justice. The petitioner contended that the order was passed in contravention of natural justice principles as no opportunity was provided for a hearing. The learned counsel for the respondents acknowledged the lack of opportunity given to the petitioner before passing the impugned order.

Judgment:
The High Court found that the impugned order passed by the second respondent indeed violated principles of natural justice by not providing the petitioner with an opportunity to be heard. Consequently, the Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the impugned order. The matter was remitted back to the second respondent for reconsideration of the appeal after affording the parties a proper hearing and to pass an appropriate order in accordance with the law. The Court kept the contentions of the parties open and noted that the pending consideration of any application did not survive for further consideration in light of the writ petition's disposal.