Sanjay Karol, CJ.—Petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s):—

(a) For issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the ex parte order dated 18.08.2022 issued vide memo number 257 passed and issued by the respondent number 2 (hereinafter referred to as the appellate authority for short) whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner under section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the Central Act 2017 for short) and Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the Bihar Act 2017 for short) has been rejected;

(b) For issuance of writ or order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the ex parte order dated 03.12.2021 passed by the respondent number 3 (hereinafter referred to as the assessing authority short) under Section 73 of the Central Act 2017 and Bihar Act 2017 and also for quashing of the summary of order issued in Form GST DRC-07, dated 3.12.2021;

(c) For further restraining the respondents from taking any coercive action against the petitioner for recovery of the amount of tax, interest and penalty in terms of the impugned orders during the pendency of the present writ application;

(d) For grant of any other relief or reliefs to which the petitioner is found entitled in the facts and circumstances of this case.

2. It is brought to our notice that vide impugned order dated 18.08.2022 passed by the Respondent No. 2 namely Additional Commissioner of State Taxes (Appeal), East Division, Patna in Appeal Case No. GST/PTN-09/2022-23, the appeal of the petitioner against the order dated 03.12.2021 passed by the Respondent No. 3 namely Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Patna North Circle, Patna in GSTIN- 10DGDPS2384M1Z6 and the summary of order dated 03.12.2021 issued in form GST DRC-07, has been rejected. The orders appeared to be exparte 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 and limitation shall not be allowed to come in the way. 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 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; (c) 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.

5. 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 18.08.2022 passed by the Respondent No. 2 namely Additional Commissioner of State Taxes (Appeal), East Division, Patna in Appeal Case No. GST/PTN-09/2022-23, order dated 03.12.2021 passed by the Respondent No. 3 namely Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Patna North Circle, Patna in GSTIN- 10DGDPS23 84M1Z6 and the summary of order dated 03.12.2021 issued in form GST DRC-07;

(b) We accept the statement of the petitioner that ten per cent of the total amount, being condition prerequisite for hearing of the appeal, already stands deposited. If that were so, we