2024 (1) TMI 1010 - HC - GST

Violation of principles of natural justice - opportunity of hearing not provided - determination of the tax due or short paid or refunded erroneously or input tax credit was wrongly availed or utilised by the petitioner for the financial year 2017-2018 - HELD THAT - Section 75(4) of CGST Act 2017 mandates that an opportunity of hearing shall be given where a request is received in writing, to the person chargeable with tax or penalty, or where any adverse decision is contemplated against such person, affording such opportunity at the appellate stage cannot substitute the said requirement at the adjudicating level. The observation of the appellate authority that the appellant was given reasonable opportunity at the adjudicating level does not get support of the records inasmuch as at the adjudicating level, only the case disclosed in the reply to the show-cause has been discussed which obviously is far short of the requirement of Section 75(4) of the said Act of 2017. The order impugned is not sustainable and is accordingly set aside - Petition allowed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
The judgment deals with the failure to provide an opportunity of hearing to the Registered Taxable Person (RTP) as required under Section 75(4) of The Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Summary:

Issue 1: Opportunity of Hearing

The Assistant Commissioner of Revenue issued a show-cause notice under Section 73(1) of The Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 to determine tax liabilities for the financial year 2017-2018. The petitioner, aggrieved by the subsequent order, appealed to the Senior Joint Commissioner of Revenue. The petitioner explicitly requested an opportunity of hearing in response to the show-cause notice, as mandated by Section 75(4) of the Act. The appellate authority's assertion that a reasonable opportunity was provided at the adjudicating level was found to be unsupported by the records. Therefore, the order was set aside, directing the respondent to dispose of the show-cause after affording the petitioner a proper opportunity of hearing.

Decision:

The impugned order was deemed unsustainable due to the lack of a proper opportunity of hearing as required by law. The order passed by the adjudicating authority was also set aside. The respondent was directed to reevaluate the show-cause notice and reply, ensuring the petitioner is granted an opportunity of hearing. The petitioner was permitted to withdraw the deposits made for the appeal case, and the case was disposed of without any costs awarded. Parties were instructed to act on the server copy of the order, and certified copies were to be provided upon request.

This summary highlights the key issues of the judgment, focusing on the failure to provide a necessary opportunity of hearing to the petitioner in accordance with the relevant legal provisions.