2024 (7) TMI 164 - HC - GST

Violation of principles of natural justice - no personal hearing provided to petitioner - non-speaking order - HELD THAT - There is no discussion with regard to the reply of the petitioner. No reasons are recorded as to why such reply was rejected except for stating that proper documents were not provided. The petitioner appears to have provided the audited financial statements, tax audit report, Form 26AS, trial balance and the reply. In view thereof, the impugned order is unreasoned and cannot be sustained. It should also be noticed that sub-section(4) of Section 75 of the applicable GST enactments mandates that a personal hearing be provided either if requested for or if an order adverse to the tax payer is proposed to be issued. Such statutory prescription was also not adhered to in this case. The impugned order dated 30.12.2023 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the respondent for reconsideration. The respondent is directed to provide a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, including a personal hearing, and thereafter issue a fresh order within three months from the date of receipt of the petitioner's reply - Petition disposed off by way of remand.

Summary

Issues: Lack of reasoning in the order, failure to provide a personal hearing

The judgment pertains to an order dated 30.12.2023 challenged for being non-speaking and for not providing a personal hearing to the petitioner. The proceedings commenced with a show cause notice on 07.09.2023, to which the petitioner responded on 04.10.2023 and 07.12.2023 following a reminder notice. The petitioner contended that the impugned order did not discuss their reply or provide reasons for rejection, and a personal hearing was not granted. The respondent, represented by Mr. T.N.C. Kaushik, mentioned that the tax proposal was confirmed due to the petitioner's failure to submit all requested documents. The court observed that the impugned order acknowledged the petitioner's reply but lacked discussion on it, merely stating that proper documents were not provided. The order was deemed unreasoned and unsustainable. Additionally, the court noted the violation of sub-section(4) of Section 75 of GST enactments, which mandates a personal hearing if requested or if an adverse order is proposed. Consequently, the order dated 30.12.2023 was set aside, and the matter remanded for reconsideration, directing the respondent to afford the petitioner a reasonable opportunity, including a personal hearing, and issue a fresh order within three months of receiving the petitioner's reply. The case, W.P.No.11625 of 2024, was disposed of with no costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.