2023 (9) TMI 393 - HC - GST

Maintainability of petition - availability of alternative remedy - ex-parte order - opportunity of hearing not provided - Condonation of delay in filing appeal - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - The delay stands sufficiently explained on account of COVID-19 restrictions. This court, notwithstanding the statutory remedy, is not precluded from interfering where, ex facie, we form an opinion that the order is bad in law. This we say so, for two reasons (a) violation of principles of natural justice, i.e., Fair opportunity of hearing. No sufficient time was afforded to the petitioner to represent his case ; (b) order passed exparte in nature, does not assign any reasons sufficient even decipherable from the record, as to how the officer could determine the amount due and payable by the assessee. The order, exparte in nature, passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, entails civil consequences. The impugned order set aside - petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Petitioner seeks relief for quashing assessment order, demand order, appellate order, and notice; seeks writs for non-coercive action, refund, fresh assessment order, and other appropriate orders.

Analysis:
- The petitioner prayed for various reliefs, including quashing assessment and demand orders, rejecting appellate order, and directing fresh assessment. The High Court noted the rejection of the appeal by the appellate authority on the ground of limitation and the exparte nature of the orders. The delay due to COVID-19 restrictions was considered valid.

- The Court found violations of natural justice principles and lack of reasons in the exparte orders. It emphasized the need for proper adjudication based on facts and circumstances, even in exparte proceedings, to prevent civil consequences. The Court decided to interfere despite statutory remedies due to these reasons.

- The Court disposed of the writ petition by quashing the impugned orders and notices, ensuring the petitioner's compliance with deposit requirements, and directing the assessing authority to decide the case on merits while affording due opportunities for hearing and document submission. The Court also ordered the de-freezing of bank accounts and non-coercive actions during the case's pendency.

- The judgment outlined detailed directions for the petitioner's cooperation, appearance before the assessing authority, and expeditious resolution of the case. It reserved liberties for challenging the order and taking other legal remedies, emphasizing digital proceedings if possible and maintaining neutrality on the case's merits.

- The Court emphasized prompt handling of future legal actions, reserved opinions on merits, and instructed electronic communication of the order to the relevant authority. The judgment concluded by disposing of the petition and any related interlocutory applications, ensuring compliance with the outlined terms and conditions.