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

2022 Supreme(Pat) 219

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
SANJAY KAROL, S. KUMAR, JJ.
M/s CICO Patel JV - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar through Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Government of Bihar & Ors. - Respondents
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 16650 of 2021
Decided On : 24-01-2022

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Anurag Saurav.
For the Respondent: Mr. Vikash Kumar, SC-11.

Importance of principles of natural justice, necessity for the Assessing Authority to pass a speaking order assigning reasons, and the right to fair opportunity of hearing.

Headnote:

Certiorari - Bihar VAT Act - Section 31 - 25 - 39 - The court quashed the order dated 31.03.2021 under section 31 of Bihar VAT Act and the Notice of Demand under Section 25 and Section 39 of the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005. The court emphasized the violation of principles of natural justice and the ex parte nature of the order, leading to civil consequences. The court directed the Assessing Authority to decide the case on merits after affording adequate opportunity to all concerned, including the writ petitioner, and to pass a speaking order assigning reasons.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought the quashing of the order dated 31.03.2021 under section 31 of Bihar VAT Act and the Notice of Demand under Section 25 and Section 39 of the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005, citing violation of principles of natural justice and ex parte nature of the order.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the order was ex parte in nature, violated principles of natural justice, and did not assign any sufficient reasons decipherable from the record. The court also directed the Assessing Authority to decide the case on merits after affording adequate opportunity to all concerned, including the writ petitioner, and to pass a speaking order assigning reasons.

Issues: Violation of principles of natural justice, ex parte nature of the order, and lack of sufficient reasons decipherable from the record.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of affording adequate opportunity to all concerned, including the writ petitioner, and the necessity for the Assessing Authority to pass a speaking order assigning reasons.

Final Decision: The court quashed the impugned order and the Notice of Demand, directed the petitioner to deposit a certain amount, and instructed the Assessing Authority to decide the case on merits after affording adequate opportunity to all concerned, including the writ petitioner, and to pass a speaking order assigning reasons.

JUDGMENT :

Sanjay Karol, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

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

i. For issuance of writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the order dated 31.03.2021 under section 31 of Bihar VAT Act passed by Respondent no. 3 whereby and whereby under Respondent no. 3 has imposed Tax amounting Rs.29,88,280.85/- in the Financial year 2015-16 without considering the fact that the petitioner has sub-contracted the entire contract on back to back basis to one M/s PPSL Capacite JV in back to back basis and petitioner had no tax liability on the entire turn over which has been sublet in the light of principle settled by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Andhra Pradesh Vrs. Larson and Turbo (2008) 9 SCC 191 and respondent in lieu of the above said principle had allowed the previous financial year transaction (2014-15) of the petitioner.

ii. For quashing of demand notice dated 31.03.2021 issued by Respondent no.3 whereby and where under an amount of Rs.29,88,280/- has been imposed against the petitioner.

iii. For issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authorities specially Respondent no. 3 to considered the case of the petitioner in the light of principle settled by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of the State of Andhra Pradesh Vrs. Larson and Turbo (2008) 9 SCC 191.

iv. For restarting the respondent authorities from recovery of tax amount from the petitioner till the disposal of the present writ application.

3. Petitioner has prayed for quashing of the impugned order dated 31.03.2021 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, State Tax, Special Circle, Patna in VAT/TIN-10011321013 (Annexure-8) and the Notice of Demand under Section 25 and Section 39 of the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005 [Notice Id: N110182137301242] Annexure- 8/1. The order appears to be ex parte in nature.

4. Shri Anurag Saurav, learned counsel for the petitioner states that 50 per cent of the impugned amount of demand already stands recovered from the petitioner. Additionally, petitioner is willing to deposit 10 per cent of the impugned demand.

5. Statement accepted and taken on record.

6. 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.

7. Statement accepted and taken on record.

8. 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.

9. We also find the authorities not to have adjudicated the matter on the attending facts and circumstances. All issues of fact and law ought to have been dealt with, even if the proceedings were ex parte in nature.

10. 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 31.03.2021 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, State Tax, Special Circle, Patna in VAT/TIN-10011321013 (Annexure-8) and the Notice of Demand under Section 25 and Section 39 of the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005 [Notice Id: N110182137301242] Annexure- 8/1;

(b) We accept the statement of the petitioner that fifty per cent of the amount of the demand

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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