2021 (6) TMI 1040 - HC - GST

Validity of order passed u/s 74(1) - Maintainability of petition - availability of alternative remedy of appeal - opportunity of hearing provided or not - HELD THAT - This Court, notwithstanding the statutory remedy, is not precluded from interfering where, ex facie, it is opined that the order is bad in law. This is for two reasons-(a) violation of principles of natural justice, i.e. Fair opportunity of hearing. No sufficient time was afforded to the petitioner to represent his case; (b) order of assessment passed ex parte in nature, does not assign any sufficient reasons even decipherable from the record, as to how the officer could determine the amount due and payable by the assessee. The order, ex parte in nature, passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, entails civil consequences. Impugned order set aside - petition allowed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
- Quashing of orders under Bihar Goods And Service Tax Act, 2017
- Attachment of bank accounts post order
- Rejection of appeal on technical grounds
- Violation of principles of natural justice
- Interference by the Court despite statutory remedy

Analysis:

Quashing of Orders:
The petitioner sought the quashing of orders dated 01.03.2020 and 03.03.2021 issued under the Bihar Goods And Service Tax Act, 2017. The High Court, after considering the violation of principles of natural justice and the lack of sufficient reasons in the ex parte assessment order, decided to quash and set aside the impugned orders. The Court emphasized the importance of fair opportunity of hearing and the need for clear reasoning in assessment orders to avoid civil consequences.

Attachment of Bank Accounts:
Post the impugned order dated 01.03.2020, the petitioner's bank accounts were attached. However, upon quashing of the orders, the High Court directed for the immediate de-freezing/de-attaching of the bank accounts. This decision was made in connection with the proceedings subject to the petition, ensuring the petitioner's access to their funds.

Rejection of Appeal:
The appeal filed by the petitioner was rejected on technical grounds of delay. Despite the availability of alternative remedies, the Court decided to intervene due to the serious nature of the violations observed in the assessment process. The Court emphasized that statutory remedies do not preclude the Court from interference when the order is found to be legally flawed.

Violation of Principles of Natural Justice:
The Court highlighted the violation of principles of natural justice, specifically the fair opportunity of hearing. Insufficient time was provided to the petitioner to represent their case adequately. The ex parte nature of the assessment order, without clear reasoning, led the Court to intervene and quash the orders to uphold the principles of natural justice.

Interference by the Court:
Despite the availability of statutory remedies, the Court decided to interfere in the matter due to the evident legal flaws in the assessment process. The Court's intervention was based on the necessity to ensure fair treatment and adherence to legal principles, even if alternative remedies exist. The judgment aimed to rectify the violations observed and provide a fair opportunity for the petitioner to present their case effectively.