9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (4) TMI 206 - HC - GSTViolation of principles of natural justice - non-service of speaking order - petitioner contends that even though they have sent a reply in Form GST DRC-06 to the show cause notice issued by the respondents dated 17.02.2022, in Form GST DRC-01, the same has not been considered in the impugned order dated 05.04.2022 by the respondents - HELD THAT - Since the petitioner has been able to convince this Court that even though they have sent a reply dated 25.02.2022 to the show cause notice sent by the respondents, the same has not been considered by the respondents in the impugned order, dated 05.04.2022, hence, there is no necessity for this Court to adjudicate on the second ground raised by the petitioner viz., non service of the speaking order dated 05.04.2022 on them. Since, it is made clear that the respondents have not considered the reply, dated 25.02.2022, even though the same was received by them, the impugned order, dated 05.04.2022 has to be quashed and the matter will have to be remanded back to the respondents for fresh consideration on merits and in accordance with law. The matter is remanded back to the respondents for fresh consideration on merits and in accordance with law - Appeal allowed by way of remand.
Issues:
Challenging order under Section 74 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for violation of natural justice principles. Non-consideration of petitioner's reply in the impugned order. Dispute regarding service of speaking order and only receiving a summary. Quashing of impugned order and remand for fresh consideration. Bank attachment notice quashed. Analysis: The writ petition was filed to challenge an order passed under Section 74 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, alleging a violation of principles of natural justice. The petitioner argued that their reply dated 25.02.2022 in Form GST DRC-06 to the show cause notice was not considered in the impugned order dated 05.04.2022. Additionally, the petitioner claimed that only a summary of the order was served, and the detailed order was not provided or uploaded on the web portal of the respondents. During the proceedings, the Additional Government Pleader for the respondents could not confirm whether the petitioner's reply dated 25.02.2022 was received. However, the petitioner presented Form GST DRC-06 as proof of receipt. Despite this, the impugned order did not reference or consider the petitioner's reply. The respondents asserted that the speaking order was uploaded along with the summary, but the petitioner disputed this, stating only the summary was served. As the petitioner demonstrated that their reply was not considered, the Court did not address the issue of non-service of the speaking order. Consequently, the Court quashed the impugned order dated 05.04.2022 and remanded the matter back to the respondents for fresh consideration, emphasizing adherence to natural justice principles and providing a personal hearing to the petitioner within twelve weeks. The bank attachment notice issued to the 3rd respondent bank was also quashed as a result of the order. The writ petition was disposed of with no costs, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.
|
