2024 (7) TMI 1384 - HC - GST

Challenge to order u/s 74(9) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 - petitioner has not been provided with the relied upon documents though asked by the petitioner from the authority - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - In view of the decision of the Hon ble Apex Court in case of THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX AND OTHERS VERSUS M/S COMMERCIAL STEEL LIMITED 2021 (9) TMI 480 - SUPREME COURT , the petitioner has tried to submit that this petition may be entertained as there is breach of principle of natural justice. However, on perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the respondent-authority has already given ample opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as prayed for. Therefore, in view of the decision of the Hon ble Apex Court, the petitioner is relegated to avail the alternative efficacious remedy under section 107 of the Act. The petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to initiate appropriate proceedings in accordance with law before the appropriate authority.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to order under section 74(9) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 based on lack of provided documents and breach of natural justice principles.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged an order dated 03.05.2024 under section 74(9) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, citing non-provision of relied upon documents and passing of the order before the petitioner could respond to a show-cause notice issued on 26.12.2023. The petitioner contended a breach of natural justice principles. However, the court noted that ample opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner, as per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in a previous case. The court emphasized that the petitioner should avail the alternative efficacious remedy under section 107 of the Act. The Hon'ble Apex Court's decision highlighted that the High Court should not entertain a writ petition when there is no violation of natural justice principles and assessment of facts should be carried out by the appellate authority. The court disposed of the petition, granting liberty to the petitioner to initiate appropriate proceedings before the appropriate authority in accordance with the law.

This judgment underscores the importance of adhering to principles of natural justice in legal proceedings. It clarifies that when ample opportunity of hearing has been provided to a petitioner, as per legal precedents, the petitioner should pursue alternative remedies available under the law. The decision also highlights the role of appellate authorities in assessing facts and the limitation of High Courts in entertaining writ petitions in the absence of violations of natural justice principles. The judgment emphasizes the need for petitioners to exhaust statutory remedies before seeking judicial intervention, ensuring a proper legal process and adherence to established legal principles.