9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 47X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the said Demand cum- Show Cause Notice. By issuance of a show cause notice, a noticee is asked to respond to the proposed action. With issuance of a show cause notice, the rights and obligations of the parties are not decided finally - A tentative view taken in the process cannot be deemed to be the final view taken in the matter. The final view is dependent on the response received from the noticee and if the noticee is able to show sufficient cause as to why no action as contemplated under the show cause notice should be taken the final view may altogether be different. In the case in hand, with the petitioner did not avail the opportunity of submitting an effective reply to the show cause notice after seeking time for four weeks and declined to avail any personal hearing. In such scenario, it is not open for the petitioner to raise a ground that it was a case of no notice and no opportunity of hearing. In view of the fact that an adequate, efficacious and statutory remedy has already been provided to assail an order like the Order-in-Original dated 08.04.2024 before the Appellate Authority, this Court is of the view that this writ petition preferred under Article 226 of the Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax period from March, 2022 to August, 2022 by stating the reason of refund as Refund of ITC on export of goods and services without payment of tax . Consequently, a refund amount was sanctioned on 07.09.2022 for Rs. 54,00,424/- [Rs. 16,13,480 under IGST + Rs. 2,93,472/- under CGST + Rs. 2,93,472/- under SGST + Rs. 32,00,000/- under Cess]. In the said Show Cause Notice, the Adjudicating Authority had further mentioned that upon verification, it was found that the petitioner/assessee had not received any ITC during the period from March, 2022 to August, 2022 against which the refund was claimed. 4. On receipt of the said Demand cum- Show Cause Notice dated 08.04.2024, the petitioner stated to have submitted a Reply on 14.05.2024 in Form GST DRC-06 and in the said Reply, the petitioner requested to re-fix the matter after four weeks to enable the petitioner to go through the notice and to check its own documents and papers as well as the transactions for the periods and do the needful thereafter. 5. By the impugned Order-in-Original dated 11.09.2024 in Form GST DRC-07 issued under Rule 142 [5], the Adjudicating Authority passed an order with a demand of Rs. 1,27,45,000/- as tax, int ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioner did not revert back to the Adjudicating Authority to submit its reply traversing the contentions raised in the Demand -cum- Show Cause Notice. He has further submitted that in the reply so submitted, the petitioner had himself stated that the petitioner did not need any personal hearing. It is his contention that it is not a case of not providing an opportunity of being heard and as such, the petitioner s case is not a case of violation of the principles of natural justice. Mr. Gogoi has further contended that the Adjudicating Authority after issuance of the Demand -cum- Show Cause Notice had waited for sufficient period of time and the impugned order was passed after elapse of a reasonable period of time. 10. I have given due consideration to the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the materials on record. 11. It is well settled that ordinarily in revenue matters, the court does not entertain a petition for a writ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, where the petitioner has a statutory remedy, which without being unduly onerous, provides an adequate and efficacious remedy. The High Court in its writ jurisdiction, does not gene ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and/or reasonable opportunity of hearing. It does not emerge from the facts of the case that the petitioner was not provided with any kind of prior opportunity and hearing before issuance of the impugned Order-in-Original. 14. In the case in hand, it is not the case of the petitioner that the petitioner did not receive the Demand cum- Show Cause Notice. On receipt of the Demand cum- Show Cause Notice, the petitioner ought to have replied to the said Demand cum- Show Cause Notice. By issuance of a show cause notice, a noticee is asked to respond to the proposed action. With issuance of a show cause notice, the rights and obligations of the parties are not decided finally. The event of issuance of a show cause notice is a step towards taking a final decision in the matter by the competent authority. A tentative view taken in the process cannot be deemed to be the final view taken in the matter. The final view is dependent on the response received from the noticee and if the noticee is able to show sufficient cause as to why no action as contemplated under the show cause notice should be taken the final view may altogether be different. In the case in hand, with the petitioner did not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tioner is not in a position to deposit the pre-deposit amount @ 10% required in preferring the statutory appeal under Section 107 [6] [b] of the CGST/AGST Act, 2017. Ms. Hawelia, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in a writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 4694/2024 involving similar issues, a co-ordinate bench of this Court has extended a benefit to the petitioner therein, who is similarly situated like the petitioner herein, by directing the Appellate Authority to permit the petitioner to file an appeal without pre-deposit, subject to the bank account[s] which had been freezed, had deposit[s] equivalent or more than amount required to be deposited in terms of Section 107 [6] [b] of the Act, 2017. Ms. Hawelia has, thus, submitted that similar benefit should be extended to the petitioner herein as its bank account has remained freezed since 05.04.2024. 18. In reply, Mr. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, Finance Taxation Department has submitted that such direction, as directed in the Judgment and Order dated 18.09.2024 passed in the writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 4694/2024, can be made herein also with similar terms and conditions. 19. In the writ petition, W.P.[C] no. 4694/2024 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
