Back
2023 Supreme(All) 2551
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
PRITINKER DIWAKER, CJ., ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J.
UTC Softech P. Ltd. - Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. and Another - Respondents
WRIT TAX NO. 867 OF 2023.
Decided On : 27-07-2023
For the Petitioner: Devendra Pratap Singh and Rishi Tandon
For the Respondent: CSC.
Subject
Taxation - Goods and Services Tax
Act Referred
Headnote
(B) Judicial proceedings - It is imperative that parties are given due notice and an opportunity to be heard before penalties are imposed. (Para 3)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner contended that a notice under Form GST DRC-01 was not served, leading to an ex-parte penalty order being passed.
Findings of Court:
The ex-parte order was set aside due to lack of service of notice, and the case was remanded for fresh orders with proper notification to the petitioner.
Issues: The primary issue was whether the petitioner was given adequate notice before the imposition of the penalty.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that for any penalty to be valid, due process must be observed, which includes serving notice and providing an opportunity to the party affected.
Result: The writ petition was disposed of with directions to remand the matter for fresh proceedings.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. notice not served; ex-parte order issued. (Para 1) |
| 2. importance of fair hearing; remand for fresh orders. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. writ petition disposed; cooperation in proceedings required. (Para 4 , 5) |
JUDGMENT
It is the case of the petitioner that the notice dated 25.01.2023 Form GST DRC-01 under Rule 142(1) of CGST Act was never served upon the petitioner and consequent thereto an ex-parte order has been passed whereby a sum of Rs. 19,72,76,879/- has been imposed upon the petitioner as penalty.
2. From the tenor of the order that has been passed by the Respondent No. 2, it is more than apparent that the order is an exparte order.
3. In such view of the matter, since prima facie, the order impugned is an ex-parte order, we set aside the same and remand the matter back to the Deputy Commissioner, respondent no. 2 to pass fresh orders after giving due notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
4. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
5. It is also expected that the petitioner shall cooperate in the proceeding and shall not take any unnecessary adjournment.
