2021 (9) TMI 153 - HC - GST

Validity of Ex-parte order passed u/s 74 - Principles of natural justice - fair opportunity and time of hearing not provided - HELD THAT - This Court, notwithstanding the statutory remedy, is not precluded from interfering where, ex facie, we form an opinion that the order is bad in law. This we say so, for two reasons- (a) violation of principles of natural justice, i.e. Fair opportunity of hearing. No sufficient time was afforded to the petitioner to represent his case; (b) order passed ex parte in nature, does not assign any sufficient reasons even decipherable from the record, as to how the officer could determine the amount due and payable by the assessee. The order, ex parte in nature, passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, entails civil consequences. Order set aside - Matter restored back with directions - Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
- Quashing of notices and orders issued under Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
- Rejection of appeal on the grounds of limitation
- Violation of principles of natural justice in passing orders without fair opportunity of hearing
- Interference by the Court in cases of orders deemed bad in law

Quashing of Notices and Orders:
The petitioner sought relief to quash notices and orders issued under the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The impugned order dated 28.12.2020, rejecting the petitioner's appeal on the grounds of being time-barred, was set aside by the Court. The Court found that the delay in filing the appeal was justified due to COVID restrictions. The Court also emphasized that the order was passed ex parte without affording the petitioner a fair opportunity to present their case.

Violation of Principles of Natural Justice:
The Court highlighted the violation of principles of natural justice in the proceedings. It noted that the order passed ex parte lacked sufficient reasoning and did not provide a fair chance for the petitioner to be heard. The Court emphasized that such orders have civil consequences and should be based on fair procedures. Consequently, the Court intervened despite the availability of statutory remedies.

Interference by the Court:
The Court, based on the violation of natural justice principles and lack of sufficient reasoning in the orders, decided to intervene and set aside the impugned orders and notices. The Court directed the Assessing Authority to re-examine the case, ensuring a fair opportunity for all parties to present their arguments. The Court also instructed the release of any frozen bank accounts and prohibited coercive actions against the petitioner during the proceedings.

In conclusion, the Court disposed of the petition by setting aside the impugned orders, directing the petitioner to make necessary deposits, and ensuring a fair and expeditious reconsideration of the case by the Assessing Authority. The Court reserved rights for both parties to challenge the order and take further legal actions if required. The judgment emphasized the importance of adhering to principles of natural justice and conducting proceedings with fairness and transparency.