2023 (2) TMI 652 - HC - GST

Violation of principles of natural justice - non-speaking orders - no reasons have been given for rejecting the petitioner's replies in the impugned assessment orders - HELD THAT - This Court is of the considered view that the principles of natural justice has been violated by the respondent before passing of the impugned assessment order for the following reasons a) No reasons have been given by the respondent for rejecting the petitioner's objections raised in the replies all dated 19.10.2022; b) Personal hearing was afforded to the petitioner even before the replies were received by the respondent; c) They are non-speaking orders. Only after receipt of the reply and only in cases where the respondent contemplates an adverse decision against the petitioner, a personal hearing will have to be granted and not before a reply is received from the petitioner, that too when the reply has been duly acknowledged in the impugned orders. The matters are remanded back to the respondent for fresh consideration on merits and in accordance with law - Petition allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to impugned orders under TNGST Act, 2017 based on violation of principles of natural justice.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged orders dated 25.10.2022 under TNGST Act, 2017, alleging violation of natural justice principles. The petitioner contended that the orders were non-speaking, personal hearing was granted before receiving replies, and no reasons were provided for rejecting replies. In responses dated 19.10.2022 to show cause notices, the petitioner clarified no mismatch existed, supported by GST return details and documents. Despite clarifications, the impugned orders lacked reasons for rejecting petitioner's contentions, constituting non-speaking orders.

The Court noted that personal hearing was granted to the petitioner before receiving replies, contrary to procedural requirements. Referring to a prior judgment interpreting Section 75(4) of TNGST Act, 2017, the Court emphasized that an opportunity of hearing should follow receipt of a written reply or when an adverse decision is contemplated. The Court found respondent's actions violated natural justice principles by not providing reasons for rejecting objections, granting personal hearing prematurely, and issuing non-speaking orders.

Consequently, the Court quashed the impugned assessment orders from 25.10.2022 and remanded the matters to the respondent for fresh consideration within twelve weeks. The respondent was directed to adhere to natural justice principles, provide a personal hearing post-receipt of replies, and issue final orders accordingly. The writ petition was disposed of without costs, and related miscellaneous petitions were closed as per the given directions.