9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (2) TMI 1026 - HC - GSTViolation of principles of natural justice - ex-parte assessment cum demand Order - It is contended that petitioner was denied opportunity to file reply in respect of intimation under Section 73 given in Form GST DRC-01A, inasmuch as, the intimation in Form GST DRC-01A was uploaded simultaneously with the show cause notice issued under Section 73(1) of the State/Central Goods and Services Tax Act - HELD THAT - In the present case, the notice under Section 73(1) of GST Act and the intimation in form GST DRC-01A was uploaded together on 10.05.2022. In form GST DRC-01A, it was mentioned that petitioner may file his submission by 25.05.2022, while by the notice issued under Section 73(1), petitioner was required to file his reply within 30 days. Thus, petitioner was denied a valuable right of filing his submission in response to the intimation in Form GST DRC-01A. Thus, a limited interference is called for in the matter. The impugned order dated 28.06.2022 is quashed. The writ petition is allowed and the matter is remanded back to the Competent Authority. Petitioner may file his reply to the intimation in Form GST DRC-01A, within two weeks from today. The Competent Authority shall consider the reply, if filed within stipulated time, within two weeks thereafter.
Issues:
Challenge to ex-parte assessment cum demand order under GST Act; Denial of opportunity to file reply in response to intimation under Section 73; Interpretation of Rule 142 of CGST Rules. Analysis: The petitioner, a taxable person under the Central & State GST Act, filed a writ petition challenging an ex-parte assessment cum demand order issued by the Deputy Commissioner, State Tax. The petitioner sought to quash the order, claiming it violated constitutional rights and principles of natural justice. The petitioner also requested the revival of their business state prior to the order issuance and compliance with natural justice principles in future proceedings. The crux of the challenge was the denial of the petitioner's right to respond to an intimation under Section 73 through Form GST DRC-01A. The petitioner argued that simultaneous uploading of the intimation and the show cause notice deprived them of the opportunity to file a reply. The Court examined Rule 142 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Rules, emphasizing that the person liable for tax must receive an intimation in Form GST DRC-01A before a notice under Section 73 is issued, allowing them to respond in Part-B of the form. The Court found that in this case, the intimation and notice were uploaded together, restricting the petitioner's ability to submit their response within the specified timelines. The Standing Counsel conceded that the petitioner was not given a fair opportunity to present their case. Consequently, the Court quashed the impugned order and remanded the matter to the Competent Authority. The petitioner was granted two weeks to file a reply to the intimation, with the Competent Authority required to consider it within two weeks thereafter. The Competent Authority was authorized to issue a fresh show cause notice if necessary. If the petitioner fails to submit a reply within the stipulated time, the GST authorities are permitted to proceed as per the law. The Court directed the issuance of a certified copy of the order promptly. This judgment highlights the importance of procedural fairness and adherence to statutory provisions in tax assessments under the GST regime.
|
