M/S. Hazrat Moulaali Steel vs. The State Of Telangana

Held

The High Court, after hearing arguments from both sides, did not comment on the merits of the contentions raised by the parties. Instead, the Court acknowledged the petitioner's request for liberty to prefer an appeal against the impugned order and summary of the order in Form GST DRC-07. The Court directed the petitioner to approach the appellate authority within a period of two weeks, along with a delay condonation application and the statutory pre-deposit. The petitioner was granted liberty to raise all available grounds of law and fact in their appeal. The appellate authority was instructed to consider the delay sympathetically, taking into account the facts and circumstances, and if satisfied, proceed to decide the appeal on merits in accordance with law. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Hazrat Moulaali Steel, represented by its proprietor, filed a writ petition before the Telangana High Court. The petition challenged the show cause notice in Form GST DRC-01 dated 27-09-2023 and the assessment order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 22-12-2023, issued by Respondent No. 2, the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Balanagar Circle. These actions pertained to the tax period of July 2017 to March 2018. The petitioner alleged that the notice and order were issued without physical or digital signatures, without a Document Identification Number (DIN), and without issuing an ASMT-10, violating CGST Act provisions and principles of natural justice. The petitioner sought to declare these actions void, illegal, and arbitrary.

Key Issues

1. Whether the show cause notice and assessment order, issued without physical or digital signatures, without DIN, and without ASMT-10, are void and illegal under the CGST Act and Rules, 2017, and violative of principles of natural justice? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the issuance of the show cause notice and assessment order without proper authentication (physical/digital signatures, DIN) and without following the prescribed procedure (ASMT-10) renders these actions void ab initio. They contended that this non-compliance violates the provisions of the CGST Act and Rules, 2017, and the principles of natural justice, making the entire process illegal and arbitrary. They relied on judicial pronouncements of the High Court to support their claim. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record specific arguments from the respondents regarding the procedural irregularities. However, the respondents were represented by the learned Assistant Government Pleader and Special Government Pleader for State Tax.