2021 (11) TMI 437 - HC - GST

Maintainability of petition - availability of alternative remedy of appeal - reasons for the conclusions drawn, missing in the impugned order - principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - It has to be accepted in law that the impugned order does not contain reasons. This conclusion is being drawn as unless the complete copy of the order containing the reasons is served on the petitioner/assessee, he may never have any right to challenge the same before any forum including the appellate forum. The fact that the Assessing Officer may have available to it another copy of the same order which may contain reasons therefor, may be of no help to the Revenue Authority as such copy of the order has not been served on the petitioner/assessee. Therefore, it cannot be relied upon to any extent. The order served on the petitioner and as has been impugned in the writ petition is wholly defective and lacking in vital aspect namely reasons for the conclusions drawn therein - matter remitted to the Assessing Officer who shall now issue a fresh notice to the petitioner and supply all adverse material (relied against the petitioner) alongwith such notice - Petition allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
1. Challenge to the summary order DRC-07 dated 20.7.2021 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Sector-1 Kasganj, Aligarh.
2. Availability of reasons in the impugned order visible on the GSTN portal.
3. Deficiency in the impugned order regarding reasons for conclusions drawn.
4. Remedial actions required for ensuring complete copies of orders on the GSTN portal.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the summary order DRC-07 dated 20.7.2021 issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax, raising concerns about the absence of reasons in the order visible on the GSTN portal. The Revenue Authority initially pointed out the availability of an alternative remedy for the petitioner to challenge the order. However, it was argued that the copy of the order on the GSTN portal did not disclose reasons, hindering the petitioner's right to appeal. The court acknowledged this issue and directed an examination of the portal to verify the visibility of the complete order for the petitioner.

Subsequently, it was revealed that the copy of the order on the GSTN portal accessible to the petitioner did not contain reasons, contrary to the copy in the personal affidavit of an official. The court emphasized that without the complete order with reasons served on the petitioner, the right to challenge the order is compromised. Consequently, the court deemed the order defective and lacking a crucial aspect, i.e., reasons for the conclusions made therein.

In light of the above, the court set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter to the Assessing Officer for issuing a fresh notice to the petitioner with all adverse material, granting two weeks for a written reply. The Assessing Officer was instructed to conduct a hearing within two weeks and provide a reasoned decision. Additionally, the court directed the Assessing Officer to upload the order on the GSTN portal and serve a copy to the petitioner via registered post AD.

Furthermore, the court instructed the concerned authority to investigate the reason for the incomplete order upload on the GSTN portal and implement measures to ensure complete order visibility for taxpayers. The court emphasized the importance of verifiable means for tracking document uploads on the portal to prevent unnecessary litigations arising from incomplete information exchanges. The writ petition was allowed with no costs imposed.