2024 (5) TMI 546 - HC - GST

Violation of principles of natural justice - reasonable opportunity was not provided to contest the tax demand on merits - petitioner was unable to respond to the show cause notice or participate in proceedings culminating in the order impugned herein - petitioner is willing to remit 10% of the disputed tax demand as a condition for remand - HELD THAT - On perusal of the impugned order, it is evident that an audit was conducted and that an audit report dated 15.09.2023 was issued. It is also clear that an intimation and show cause notice preceded the impugned order. In these circumstances, the petitioner cannot be absolved of responsibility as a registered person to monitor the GST portal. At the same time, it is noticeable that the tax proposal was confirmed because the petitioner did not submit a reply along with supporting documents. Therefore, albeit by putting the petitioner on terms, the interest of justice demands that the petitioner be provided an opportunity. The impugned order dated 29.12.2023 is set aside and the matter is remanded for reconsideration subject to the condition that the petitioner remits 10% of the disputed tax demand as agreed to within a maximum period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Within the aforesaid period, the petitioner is also permitted to submit a reply to the show cause notice - Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues involved:
The petitioner challenges an order for lack of opportunity to contest tax demand on merits.

Summary:

Issue 1: Opportunity to contest tax demand
The petitioner, a 78-year-old individual suffering from illnesses, was unable to respond to the show cause notice due to health reasons. The petitioner asserts readiness to address defects in the order if given an opportunity and is willing to remit 10% of the disputed tax demand for remand.

Issue 2: Adequacy of opportunity provided
The Government Advocate argues that an audit was conducted, and the show cause notice followed the audit report issuance to the petitioner, indicating sufficient opportunity. The petitioner's responsibility as a registered person to monitor the GST portal is noted, and the tax proposal was confirmed due to the lack of reply with supporting documents. However, in the interest of justice, the petitioner is granted another opportunity.

Judgment:
The High Court sets aside the impugned order and remands the matter for reconsideration. The petitioner must remit 10% of the disputed tax demand within three weeks and submit a reply to the show cause notice within the same period. After verification and satisfaction of the remittance, the respondent is directed to provide a reasonable opportunity, including a personal hearing, and issue a fresh order within two months from the receipt of the petitioner's reply. The writ petition is disposed of without costs, and connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.