2023 (2) TMI 360 - HC - GST

Rejection of application seeking refund - rejection on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice - calling petitioner for physical / virtual hearing within a period of seven days from the date of the show cause notice - HELD THAT - Admittedly, the show cause notice dated 21.11.2022 issued at 18 17 33 hrs to the petitioner, calls upon the petitioner to submit a reply within a period of 15 days. But, however, in the very same show cause notice, the petitioner has been called upon to appear before the respondent on 28.11.2022 at 03 00 p.m. either through physical / virtual hearing. Having given time for the petitioner to submit a reply within a period of 15 days from 21.11.2022 at 18 17 33 hrs, the respondent ought not to have called the petitioner for physical / virtual hearing on 28.11.2022 at 03 00 p.m. within a period of seven days from 21.11.2022 being the date of the show cause notice. Learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent has also received instructions and does not dispute the statements made by the petitioner in the Affidavit filed in support of this Writ Petition with regard to the dates and events. Therefore, it is made clear that the principles of natural justice has been violated by the respondent before passing of the impugned order rejecting the petitioner's application seeking for refund. The impugned order has to be quashed and the matter has to be remanded back to the respondent for fresh consideration on merits and in accordance with law, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court - Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to impugned order rejecting refund application on grounds of violation of principles of natural justice.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged an order rejecting their refund application, citing a violation of natural justice principles. The show cause notice issued to the petitioner required a response within 15 days but also called for a hearing within seven days, which the court found contradictory. Despite the petitioner submitting a reply and requesting a personal hearing, the assessment order did not provide for a personal hearing or address the objections raised in the reply.

The court noted that the respondent did not dispute the timeline of events presented by the petitioner, acknowledging a breach of natural justice principles. Consequently, the court quashed the impugned order and remanded the matter to the respondent for fresh consideration within a specified timeframe, emphasizing adherence to natural justice principles and granting a personal hearing to the petitioner.

The court directed the respondent to issue final orders within twelve weeks, ensuring due process and a personal hearing for the petitioner. The writ petition was disposed of without costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed as a result of the judgment.