IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
SANJAY KAROL, RAJAN GUPTA, JJ.
M/s K.R. Steel Traders - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar, through the Principal Secretary cum Commissioner, Department of State Taxes, Government of Bihar & Ors. - Respondents
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17795 of 2021
Decided On : 21-10-2021
Bihar Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 - Section 140 and 73(9) - Limitation Act, 1963 - Section 5 - Tax - Declaration - Appeal of petitioner against the order passed by Respondent No. 3 and Summary of order in Form GST DRC-07 passed has been rejected merely on the grounds of being barred by limitation - Both the orders were ex parte in nature - Whether petition is maintainable.
Finding of the Court : Court is of the considered view that this Court, notwithstanding the statutory remedy, is not precluded from interfering where, ex facie, we form an opinion that the order is bad in law - The order, ex parte in nature, passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, entails civil consequences.
Result : Petition disposed of.
JUDGMENT :
Sanjay Karol, J.
1. Petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s):
(b) For issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the order dated 16.08.2019 passed by the respondent No. 3 under section 140 and 73(9) of the Bihar goods and service tax act 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the Bihar act 2017 for short) and summary or order issued vide reference number ZA819002355U in form GST DRC-07 dated 29.08.2019 by the respondent number 3 on grounds of the same being without jurisdiction;
(c) For holding and declaration that the appeal preferred by the petitioner on 10.12.2020 is well within limitation prescribed under section 107 of the Bihar act 2017 in view of the order dated 30.04.2020 and 18.05.2020 passed in C.W.J.C. number 5633 of 2020 by full bench of this honourable court read with the order dated 23.03.2020 passed by honourable Supreme Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3 of 2020;
(d) For further holding and a declaration that the limitation prescribed under section 107 of the act 2017 can be extended under section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 and the provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963 shall apply with full force in view of section 29(2) of the said act;
(e) For grant of any other relief or reliefs to which the petitioner is found entitled in the fact and circumstances of this case.”
2. It is brought to our notice that vide impugned order dated 16.12.2020 passed by Respondent No. 2, namely Additional Commissioner of State Taxes (Appeal), Patna West Division, Patna, in Reference No. ZD101220015172J (Annexure-5), in Form GST APL-02, the appeal of the petitioner against the order dated 16.08.2019, passed by Respondent No. 3 namely the Joint Commissioner of State Taxes, Patna South Circle, Patna (Annexure-2) and Summary of order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 29.08.2019 passed by Deputy Commissioner of State Tax Patna South, Jurisdiction-Patna South, Patna West, Bihar Patna in Reference No. ZA100819002355U has been rejected merely on the grounds of being barred by limitation. Both the orders were ex parte in nature.
3. In our considered view, the delay stands sufficiently explained on account of COVID restrictions.
4. Learned counsel for the Revenue, states that he has no objection if the matter is remanded to the Assessing Authority for deciding the case afresh. Also, the case shall be decided on merits. Also, during pendency of the case, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner.
5. Statement accepted and taken on record.
6. However, having heard learned counsel for the parties as also perused the record made available, we are of the considered view that this Court, notwithstanding the statutory remedy, is not precluded from interfering where, ex facie, we form an opinion that the order is bad in law. This we say so, 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 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. As such, on this short ground alone, we dispose of the present writ petition in the following mutually agreeable terms:
(a) We quash and set aside the impugned order dated 16.12.2020 passed by Respondent No. 2, namely Additional Commissioner of State Taxes (Appeal), Patna West Division, Patna, in Reference No. ZD101220015172J (Annexure-5), in Form GST APL-02, the order dated 16.08.2019, passed by Respondent No. 3 namely the Joint Commissioner of State Taxes, Patna Sout
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.