2024 (9) TMI 822 - HC - GST

Challenge to assessment order - petitioner failed to file a reply or avail of the opportunity to be heard - HELD THAT - Considering the conduct of the petitioner in depositing a part of amount in pursuance of the inspection, to balance the interest of the petitioner and the Revenue Department, the impugned order is quashed and the case is remitted back to the respondent to pass a fresh order on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of 3 months from today. The impugned order which stands quashed in this order shall be treated as addendum to the Notice in Form GST DRC-01 dated 23.09.2023. The petitioner shall file a consolidated reply within a period of 30 days from today. The petitioner is also directed to deposit 10% of the balance amount within a period of 30 days from today. Petition dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Challenge against Assessment Order under GST Enactments for AY 2017-2018.
2. Failure to respond to Notices and Personal Hearing Requests.
3. Deemed objections due to lack of response.
4. Request for additional opportunity to respond.
5. Availability of alternate remedy before Appellate Authority.
6. Quashing of impugned order and remittance for fresh order.
7. Direction for filing consolidated reply and depositing balance amount.
8. Requirement for petitioner to be heard before final order.
9. Consequences of failure to comply within specified period.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the Assessment Order dated 04.03.2024 under the respective GST Enactments for AY 2017-2018. The petitioner's premise was inspected, defects were noted, and the petitioner paid the due tax amounts. Despite receiving multiple Notices and Personal Hearing Requests, the petitioner failed to respond adequately. Consequently, the respondent deemed the petitioner to have no objections to the reasons stated in the notices due to lack of response. The petitioner sought an additional opportunity to respond, emphasizing a fair case to defend. The respondent argued that the Writ Petition lacked merit as the petitioner had an alternate remedy before the Appellate Authority. After considering submissions, the Court balanced the interests of the petitioner and the Revenue Department by quashing the impugned order and remitting the case back to the respondent for a fresh order within 3 months.

Furthermore, the quashed order was to be treated as an addendum to a previous Notice, requiring the petitioner to file a consolidated reply within 30 days and deposit 10% of the balance amount within the same period. The petitioner was assured a hearing before the final order was passed. Failure to comply with the directives within the specified period would empower the respondent to proceed against the petitioner as the Writ Petition was dismissed. The Writ Petition was ultimately disposed of with no costs, and the connected Miscellaneous Petition was closed.