2024 (2) TMI 360 - HC - GST

Validity of summons issued - facing proceedings both at the instance of Central and State GST authorities - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - The documents on record disclose that both an intimation and show cause notice were issued and admittedly received by the petitioner. The show cause notice clearly states that the petitioner was being provided an opportunity of personal hearing. Likewise, the reminder notice dated 02.09.2023 also indicates that a personal hearing was being provided to the petitioner on 05.09.2023. As contended by learned counsel for the petitioner, it is no doubt anomalous that such personal hearing was provided before the last date fixed for the submission of a reply. Even so, nothing prevented the petitioner from attending the personal hearing and thereafter submitting a reply to the show cause notice. Admittedly, this was not done - thus the principles of natural justice were not violated. Whether the impugned orders call for interference on any other grounds? - HELD THAT - The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned orders do not contain any findings on the conclusions of the Intelligence Wing is correct. However, under Section 16 of the TNGST Act read with Rule 36 of the rules framed thereunder, the registered person is under an obligation to establish purchase, including receipt of goods or services, as the case may be - Ordinarily, the petitioner would be required to produce invoices, e-way bills, payment receipts, lorry receipts, delivery challans and the like to establish purchase and receipt of goods. Since the impugned order was issued primarily on the basis that such documents were not submitted by the petitioner, it is not appropriate to adjudicate this issue in exercise of discretionary jurisdiction when the petitioner has an alternative remedy. The orders impugned herein do not call for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India - Accordingly, the writ petitions are disposed of by leaving it open to the petitioner to impugn the orders impugned herein by way of statutory appeals.

Summary

Issues involved:
Two separate assessment orders dated 09.10.2023 for distinct assessment periods are challenged in the writ petitions.

Details of the judgment:

Violation of Principles of Natural Justice:
The documents on record show that both an intimation and show cause notice were issued to the petitioner, providing an opportunity for a personal hearing. Although the personal hearing was scheduled before the deadline for submitting a reply, the petitioner did not attend the hearing or submit a reply. Therefore, it is concluded that principles of natural justice were not violated.

Lack of Findings on Intelligence Wing's Conclusions:
The petitioner argued that the impugned orders did not address the conclusions of the Intelligence Wing. However, under Section 16 of the TNGST Act, the registered person must establish purchase and receipt of goods. Despite claiming that relevant documents were with the accountant who was unavailable during inspection, the petitioner did not submit the documents later. Since the impugned order was based on the absence of these documents, it is deemed inappropriate to intervene in discretionary jurisdiction when the petitioner has an alternative remedy.

Conclusion:
The impugned orders do not warrant interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petitions are disposed of, allowing the petitioner to challenge the orders through statutory appeals within the condonable period. If appeals are filed within two weeks, the appellate authority is directed to consider and decide on the merits. No costs are awarded, and connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.