Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
RITU BAHRI, MANISHA BATRA, JJ.
M/s. Daman Textiles – Petitioner
Versus
Union of India & Ors. – Respondents
CWP NO. 20909 of 2023
Decided On : 05-10-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. double jeopardy in tax enforcement (Para 1 , 4) |
| 2. court's notice of motion and representation (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. right to a fair hearing in tax matters (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. setting aside of impugned order due to procedural improprieties (Para 7) |
JUDGMENT
Ms. Ritu Bahri, J. (Oral)
The present petition has been filed seeking quashing of show cause notice in Form GST DRC-01 bearing No. AW/FGS/294 dated 23.11.2022 (P-8) as well as impugned order dated 25.01.2023 (P-1), vide which the tax liability has been imputed upon the petitioner firm on account of inadmissible ITC claimed from bogus firms.
2. Issue notice of motion.
3. On asking of the Court, Ms. Anu Pal, Sr DAG Punjab and Mr. Sourabh Goel, Sr. Panel counsel, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State and respondent-department respectively.
4. The precise grievance of the petitioner before this Court is that respondent No. 4 has already issued a show cause notice dated 09.03.2018 (P-4) for the same transaction and for the same period. But now again a fresh show cause notice has been issued to the petitioner in Form GST DRC-01 dated 23.11.2022 (P-8) and without opportunity of personal hearing, the impugned order has been passed on 25.01.2023 confirming the tax liability of Rs.24,60,526/-along with interest amounting to Rs.19,55,560/- and penalty amounting to Rs.12,30,264/- under Section 74 (11) of the CGST/SGST Act, 2017.
5. Learned counsel submits that the two show cause notices on the same cause of action are liable to be set aside and further no opportunity of hearing was provided to the petitioner before passing the impugned order.
6. Learned State counsel on instructions from Sh. Shinee Singh, Assistant Ludhiana-3 has informed the Court that it is right that no opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner.
7. In view of the above factual position, the present petition is allowed and impugned order dated 25.01.2023 (P-1) is set aside. A liberty is given to the respondent-department to pass fresh order, after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and after serving show cause notice dated 23.11.2022 (P-8).
The issuance of a show cause notice and order without providing the opportunity for a personal hearing violates principles of natural justice.
The impugned order must align with statutory provisions in tax law, with the court emphasizing due process for the petitioner.
Multiple Show Cause Notices can exist for the same tax period under GST if they pertain to different subjects, reinforcing the absence of a bar under the GST regulations.
Writ petitions can be dismissed if the impugned order is based on considered replies, despite issues regarding notice sufficiency.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of personal hearing and compliance with statutory provisions, emphasizing the principles of natural justice in adjudicative proc....
The jurisdiction under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act prohibits State GST authorities from initiating parallel proceedings once Central GST proceedings have commenced on the same subject matt....
The court emphasized the mandatory requirement of granting a hearing under Section 75(4) of the GST Act before making any adverse decisions.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
