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

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

(i) For issuance of appropriate writ/order/direction for setting aside order bearing Memo no. 346 dated 02.06.2022 passed by Additional Commissioner (Appeal), Tirhut Division, Murffarpur in Appeal Case No. AD1002210029403 for the financial year 2018-19 whereby and where under the Appellate Authority upheld the order dated 08.01.2021 passed by Respondent no.4 and directed to pay Rs. 5,43,37,268 towards tax, interest and penalty issue APL-lV to the petitioner.

(ii) For issuance of an appropriate writ/ order/ direction for setting aside order bearing reference no. ZD100121005040V dated 08.01.2021 passed by Joint Commissioner of State Tax jurisdiction, West Circle, Muzaffarpur, whereby and where under respondent rejected the Input Tax Credit Claim by the petitioner in , Form GSTR3B for the financial year 2018-19 and an amount of Rs. 71,68,634/- was imposed as tax interest and penalty on the petitioner under section 73 (9) of BGST Act.

(iii) For setting aside order dated 07.12.2020 passed by Joint Commissioner of State Tax Jurisdiction, West Circle, Muzaffarpur, has rejected the input tax credit of the petitioner and imposed the tax including tax and penalty amounting of Rs. 71,68,634/- on the petitioner under section 73 (9) of BGST Act and a direction was issued to raised demand in the Form of GST DRC 07.

(iv) For setting aside the demand notice issued in the Form of DRC 07

(v) For issuance of an appropriate Writ(s), order(s), and/or direction(s), as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case in the interest of justice.

(vi) Refund of the deposit made by petitioner along with interest.

(vii) Cost.

2. Petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 02.06.2022 passed by the Additional Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal), Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur vide Memo No. 346 in Appeal Case No. AD1002210029403 for the period 2018-19 (Annexure-9); order dated 07.12.2020 passed by the Joint Commissioner of State Tax, West Circle, Muzaffarpur, (Annexure-7) and summary of the order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 08.01.2021 passed in Reference No. ZD100121005040V (Annexure-7/1).

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 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.

5. 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 02.06.2022 passed by the Additional Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal), Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur vide Memo No. 346 in Appeal Case No. AD1002210029403 for the period 2018-19 (Annexure-9); order dated 07.12.2020 passed by the Joint Commissioner of State Tax, West Circle, Muzaffarpur, (Ann