2024 (6) TMI 1095 - HC - GST

Violation of principles of natural justice - grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner has not received notice from the 1st respondent before passing an order under Section 73 (9) of the Act - non-intimation of correct address - HELD THAT - Having not intimated the correct address for communication, the petitioner cannot complain that there is violation of the principles of natural justice inasmuch as the petitioner was not served with notice. Therefore, Ext. P3 cannot be impugned for violation of the principles of natural justice. There are no reason to entertain the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Without prejudice to any other remedy as may be available to the petitioner in law, this writ petition is dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to Ext. P3 order under Section 73(9) of CGST/KSGST Act, 2017 based on lack of notice and violation of natural justice.

Analysis:
The petitioner, an assessee under CGST/KSGST Rules, challenged Ext. P3 order issued under Section 73(9) of the Act by the 1st respondent, alleging lack of notice and violation of natural justice. The petitioner contended that the shop being closed in 2020, notices sent to the shop's address prevented response or appeal. However, Ext. P3 indicated a show cause notice was issued under Section 73(1) to the petitioner, who failed to reply or submit documents against the proposal. The court noted the petitioner's responsibility to update the communication address with the Department, emphasizing that failure to do so could result in notices being sent to the provided address for adjudication. As the correct address was not intimated, the petitioner's claim of natural justice violation due to lack of notice was dismissed. Consequently, the writ petition under Article 226 was not entertained.

The judgment clarified that the petitioner's failure to update the address for communication with the Department led to notices being sent to the shop's address, where the petitioner was unaware of the proceedings. As the State Tax Officer can only send notices to the address provided, completion of adjudication proceedings at that address was deemed valid. The court emphasized that the petitioner's failure to update the address precluded a complaint of natural justice violation, as Ext. P3 was not impugned on those grounds. Ultimately, the court dismissed the writ petition, while indicating that other legal remedies may still be pursued by the petitioner in accordance with the law.