2022 (12) TMI 1033 - HC - GST

Maintainability of petition - validity of order of assessment under Section 50 74 of the Rajasthan Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 - challenge on the ground that these writ petitions have been filed against the order of assessment though the petitioner has an efficacious and alternative statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the Act - flagrant violation of statutory provisions with regard to issuance of show cause notice - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - No case of violation of principles of natural justice is made out by the petitioner. It is not that overnight the orders were passed against the petitioner. A detailed inquiry was made against the petitioner. Summons under Section 70 of the Act were issued on several occasions and opportunity was granted to provide information. According to respondents it raises an issue of disputed questions of fact, as the petitioner only submitted partial information and not the complete information and suppressed details of dispatch of diesel. The petitioner has relied upon several judgments not only seeking to raise issue on the merits of the case but also on the allegation of violation of law and violation of principles of natural justice. None of those judgments come to the aid of the petitioner as in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case where the petitioner was afforded as many as three opportunities of hearing, he failed to file any reply - in the absence of breach of fundamental rights; violation of principles of natural justice; excess of jurisdiction; or a challenge to the vires of the statute or delegated legislation, the writ petition would not be maintainable. We are not inclined to entertain these writ petitions and to go into correctness of the order of assessment and leave this to be dealt with by the appellate authority in the event the writ petitioner choses to avail his right of appeal as provided under Section 107 of the Act - the objection of maintainability of the writ petitions is sustained and the writ petitions are held to be not maintainable, as the petitioner has an efficacious alternative statutory remedy of filing of an appeal. Petition dismissed.

Issues Involved:
1. Maintainability of the writ petitions in light of the alternative statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the Rajasthan Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.
2. Alleged violation of principles of natural justice by the respondents.
3. Compliance with statutory provisions, particularly the issuance of show cause notice and summary of grounds in form DRC-01.
4. Adequacy of opportunities provided to the petitioner to respond to the show cause notice.

Detailed Analysis:

Maintainability of the Writ Petitions:
The primary issue raised by the respondents was the maintainability of the writ petitions, arguing that the petitioner had an efficacious and alternative statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the Rajasthan Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The court emphasized that recent judicial pronouncements by the Supreme Court, including the cases of *Assistant Commissioner of State Tax and Others Versus Commercial Steel Limited* and *State of Maharashtra and Others Versus Greatship (India) Limited*, have settled the legal position that writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India are not maintainable against assessment orders when an alternative statutory remedy is available, except in exceptional circumstances such as breach of fundamental rights, violation of principles of natural justice, excess of jurisdiction, or a challenge to the vires of the statute.

Alleged Violation of Principles of Natural Justice:
The petitioner contended that the impugned order suffered from a violation of principles of natural justice, arguing that adequate opportunity to file a reply to the show cause notices was not provided, and that the impugned orders were passed without considering the petitioner's reply. However, the court found that the petitioner was granted multiple opportunities to respond to the show cause notices and summons, but failed to provide the necessary information or file a reply. The court noted that the petitioner requested adjournments on several occasions and did not avail the opportunity to submit a reply, thus no violation of principles of natural justice was established.

Compliance with Statutory Provisions:
The petitioner argued that the mandatory requirement of issuing a summary of grounds in form DRC-01, as per Rule 142 of the Rajasthan Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017, was not complied with. The court examined the show cause notices and found that they contained detailed grounds and provisions of law under which the tax was proposed, thus ensuring substantial compliance with the statutory requirements. The court held that the absence of form DRC-01 was a technical issue and did not render the action illegal, as the petitioner had full notice and knowledge of the material particulars.

Adequacy of Opportunities Provided:
The petitioner claimed that the statutory provision under Section 75(5) of the Act, which entitles a person to three opportunities, was not adhered to. The court found that the petitioner was indeed granted three adjournments but failed to submit any reply. The court emphasized that the petitioner's failure to file a reply despite multiple opportunities negated the argument of inadequate opportunities being provided.

Conclusion:
The court concluded that the writ petitions were not maintainable due to the availability of an efficacious alternative statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the Act. The court dismissed the writ petitions, directing the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy of appeal, and ensured that the period during which the petitions were pending would not be counted for the purposes of limitation in filing the appeal.

← Previous Next →