2021 (2) TMI 194 - HC - GST

Principles of Natural Justice - validity of assessment orders - petitioner has not been afforded an effective opportunity of hearing in the matter - HELD THAT - he petitioner has not been afforded an effective opportunity of hearing in the matter. The order has been passed exparte. The petitioner has placed on record a medical certificate dated 05.03.2020 certifying that the partner of the petitioner firm was suffering from Infective Hepatits and on bed rest between 06.09.2019 and 18.02.2020. - It is not in dispute that the petitioner has received the orders of assessment and filed statutory appeals on 28.02.2020 with a delay of 30 days/ Applications seeking condonation of delay were also filed. However, on 13.03.2020, the appeals were returned for the reason that they were not filed online, date of receipt of orders was not produced and pre-deposit of 10% of the disputed tax was not effected. Around then, the COVID pandemic struck and the petitioner appears to have lost sight of proceedings thereafter. In the interim, a bank account of the petitioner also appears to have been attached in July, 2020. The impugned orders have been passed without the petitioner having been extended an effective opportunity of hearing to put forth its contentions - appeal allowed by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to three orders of assessment passed by the State Tax Officer under the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 for the periods 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20.

Analysis:
The High Court addressed the challenge in the Writ Petitions concerning the three orders of assessment issued by the State Tax Officer. The Court noted that the petitioner had not been given a proper opportunity of hearing, as the orders were passed ex parte. The petitioner provided a medical certificate indicating that a partner of the firm was ill during the relevant period. Despite receiving the orders and filing appeals with a delay, the appeals were returned for not being filed online, lacking the date of order receipt, and not fulfilling the pre-deposit requirement. The Court recognized that the COVID-19 pandemic may have caused the petitioner to overlook the proceedings, leading to the attachment of the petitioner's bank account.

The Court found that the impugned orders were issued without affording the petitioner an effective opportunity to present its case. Considering the circumstances, including the medical certificate and timely approach to the appellate authority, the Court decided to set aside the orders dated 18.10.2019. The Court suggested remanding the matter to provide the petitioner with a fair hearing, which the Government Advocate did not oppose. The Court directed the petitioner to appear before the first respondent on a specified date without further notice. It ordered the first respondent to pass fresh orders of assessment by a certain deadline, taking into account all objections and evidence presented by the petitioner.

In conclusion, the High Court allowed the Writ Petitions, setting aside the impugned orders and directing a de novo assessment process. The attachment of the petitioner's bank account was to continue until the final assessment orders were issued. The Court did not impose any costs on the parties and closed the connected Miscellaneous Petitions.