2024 (8) TMI 1455 - HC - GST

Challenge to order passed by the respondent No.2 under Section 74 read with Section 122 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - The factual matrix is such that the matter is squarely covered by a coordinate Bench judgment of this Court in MAHAVEER TRADING COMPANY VERSUS DEPUTY COMMISSIONER STATE TAX AND ANOTHER 2024 (3) TMI 334 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT where it was held that ' the impugned order cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. It has been passed in gross violation of fundamental principles of natural justice. The self imposed bar of alternative remedy cannot be applied in such facts. If applied, it would be of no real use. In fact, it would be counter productive to the interest of justice.' Upon a perusal of record, it appears that the factual matrix is very similar to one in Mahaveer Trading Company's case - there are no reason to take a different stand. The impugned order dated June 21, 2024 is quashed and set-aside with a direction given to the officer concerned to grant the petitioner another opportunity of filing a fresh reply and thereafter fix a date of hearing and pass a reasoned order - Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Violation of natural justice in passing the impugned order under the UPGST Act.

Analysis:
The High Court heard a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India where the petitioner challenged an order passed by the respondent under the UPGST Act. The Court noted that the factual matrix was similar to a previous judgment of Mahaveer Trading Company. In that judgment, it was emphasized that personal hearing must be offered to the noticee before any adverse order is passed in an adjudication proceeding. Denying the opportunity of personal hearing would violate fundamental principles of natural justice. The Court held that the impugned order was passed in gross violation of natural justice and could not be sustained. The self-imposed bar of alternative remedy was deemed counterproductive to the interest of justice in this case, as the appeal authority did not have the authority to remand the proceedings.

The Court, upon reviewing the record, found no reason to deviate from the principles established in the Mahaveer Trading Company case. Consequently, the Court quashed and set aside the impugned order dated June 21, 2024. The officer concerned was directed to grant the petitioner another opportunity to file a fresh reply, fix a date of hearing, and pass a reasoned order. The Court mandated that this entire process should be completed within two months from the date of the judgment. Finally, the writ petition was disposed of by the Court.