SANJAY KAROL, CJ.:–Heard learned counsel for the parties.

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

i. For setting aside the order dated 25.02.2020 issued by Assistant Commissioner State Tax, Bhagalpur Circle, Bhagalpur, whereby Interest of Rs. 74474/-. has been imposed under Section 75 (12) and Rule 142(5) of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for the Financial Year 2019-20, Period May' 2019 but without issuance of notice in terms of Rule 142 of Bihar Goods and Services Tax Rule, 2017 as also in gross violation of principle of natural justice.

ii. For setting aside consequential DRC 07 Dated 26.02.2020 issued by Assistant Commissioner State Tax, Bhagalpur Circle, Bhagalpur, whereby a demand of Rs. 74474/- has been issued for the Financial Year 2019-2020, Period May 2019.

iii. For setting aside the appellant order dated 09.09.2021 contained in Memo No. 267 Dated 09.09.2021 passed by Additional Commissioner State Tax (Appeal), Bhagalpur Division, Bhagalpur, whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed.

iv. For setting aside FORM GST APL 04 Dated 15.09.2021 issued by Additional Commissioner to State Tax, Bhagalpur Jurisdiction, Bhagalpur, whereby Demand of Rs. 73753 has been issued.

v. For any other relief for which the petitioner may be deemed entitled to.

2. It is brought to our notice that vide impugned order dated 09.09.2021 passed by the Respondent No. 6 namely the Additional Commissioner, State Tax (Appeal), Bhagalpur Division, Bhagalpur in Appeal Case No. (ARN) AD100320000381B, (Annexure-6), the appeal of the petitioner against the order dated 25.02.2020, passed by the Respondent No. 9 namely the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Bhagalpur Circle, Bhagalpur, in GSTIN No. 10AFHPC6919C1Z3 (Annexure-4) and Summary of the Order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 26.02.2020 in Reference No. ZA100220027337C (Annexure-5) has been rejected. Also, the petitioner’s contention of applicability of amendment brought in by virtue of Section 50 had not been taken into account. Both the orders were ex parte in nature.

3. 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.

Statement accepted and taken on record.

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 reasons sufficient enough 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. 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 to be ex parte in nature. As such, we dispose of the present writ petition in the following mutually agreeable terms:

(a) We quash and set aside the impugned order dated 09.09.2021 passed by the Respondent No. 6 namely the Additional Commissioner, State Tax (Appeal), Bhagalpur Division, Bhagalpur in Appeal Case No. (ARN) AD100320000381B, (Annexure-6), order dated 25.02.2020, passed by the Respondent No. 9 namely the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Bhagalpur Circle, Bhagalpur, in GSTIN No. 10AFHPC6919C1Z3 (Annexure-4) and Summary of the Order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 26.02.2020 in Reference No. ZA100220027337C (Annexure-5) as