SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Pat) 184

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Sanjay Karol, S. Kumar, JJ.
M/s Pramod Khad Bhandar - Appellant
Versus
The Union Of India & Ors. - Respondent
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No 8454 of 2021
Decided On : 07-06-2021

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Gautam Kumar Kejriwal, Advocate, Mr. Atal Bihari Pandey, Advocate Mr. Alok Kumar Jha, Advocate, for the Appellant; Dr. K.N. Singh, ASG, Mr. Anshuman Singh, Sr. S.C., CGST & CX Mr. Vikash Kumar, S.C. 11, for the Respondent.

Headnote:

Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – Section 16(4) – Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – Section 73 – Constitution of India – Article 226 – Ex-parte Order passed in violation of principles of natural justice, entails civil consequences – High Court, notwithstanding statutory remedy, is not precluded from interfering where, ex facie, it form opinion that order is bad in law – Impugned order passed by Assistant Commissioner of State Taxes set aside. (Paras 3 to 6)

JUDGMENT

1. The proceedings of the Court are being conducted by Hon'ble the Chief Justice/ Hon'ble Judges through Video Conferencing from their residential offices/residences. Also, the Advocates and the Staffs joined the proceedings through Video Conferencing from their residences/offices.

Date : 07-06-2021

Learned counsel for the parties desire the matter be taken up today.

Petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s):-

2. It is brought to our notice that post passing of the impugned order dated 5th of March, 2020, petitioner's bank account(s) also stands attached.

3. According to the Revenue, petitioner has an equally alternative efficacious remedy of filing an appeal under the provisions of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

4. 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 of March, 2020 passed by Respondent No. 4, namely the Assistant Commissioner of State Taxes, Sasaram Circle, Sasaram in Reference No. ZA100320005615G [GSTIN No. 10AOCPS4190K2ZW] under Section 73 of the State Act and summary of order issued in form GST DRC-07 dated 05.03.2020 under Section 73 of the State Act.;

(b) We accept the statement of the petitioner that 10 per cent of the total amount, being condition prerequisite for hearing of the appeal, already stands deposited;

(c) Further the petitioner undertakes to additionally deposit ten per cent of the amount of the demand raised before the Assessing Officer. This shall be done within four weeks.

(d) This deposit shall be without prejudice to the respective rights and contention of the parties and subject to the order passed by the Assessing Officer. However, if it is ultimately found that the petitioner's deposit is in excess, the same shall be refunded within two months from the date of passing of the order;

(e) In this view of the matter, we also direct for defreezing/de-attaching of the bank account(s) of the writ-petitioner attached in reference to the proceedings, subject matter of present petition. This shall be done immediately.

(f) Petitioner undertakes to appear before the Assessing Officer on 21st of July, 2021 at 10:30 A.M., if possible through digital mode;

(g) Opportunity of hearing shall be afforded to the parties to place on record all essential documents and materials, if so required and desired;

(h) The Assessing Officer shall pass a fresh order only after affording adequate opportunity to all concerned, including the writ petitioner;

(i) Petitioner through learned counsel undertakes to fully cooperate in such proceedings and not take unnecessary adjournment;

(j) The Assessing Officer shall decide the matter on merits expeditiously, preferably within a period of two months from the date of appearance of the petitioner;

(k) Liberty reserved to the petitioner to challenge the order, if required and desired;

(1) Equally, liberty reserved to the parties to take recourse to such other remedies as are otherwise available in accordance with law;

(m) We are hopeful that as and when petitioner takes recourse to such remedies, before the appropriate forum, the same shall be dealt with, in accordance with law, wit

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top