M/S Nakshatra Housekeeping Services vs. The Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court did not delve into the merits of the contentions raised by either party. Instead, acknowledging the Petitioner's request for liberty to file an appeal, the Court directed that if the Petitioner files an appeal within two weeks, along with the statutory pre-deposit and an application for condonation of delay, the appellate authority shall consider it sympathetically. The appellate authority is to consider the appeal in accordance with law, taking into account that the Petitioner had been pursuing writ remedy before this Court. The Petitioner is also granted liberty to raise all grounds, both legal and factual, before the appellate authority. The writ petition was disposed of with this liberty, and no order as to costs was made. Any pending miscellaneous applications were also closed.

Facts

The Petitioner, M/s Nakshatra Housekeeping Services (NHKS), filed a writ petition challenging an Order-in-Original No. 12/GST/2023-24 dated July 17, 2023, passed by the Principal Commissioner of Central Tax, Hyderabad GST Commissionerate. This order demanded Rs. 2,16,84,186/- for the financial year 2018-19. NHKS contended that the order was passed without issuing a notice to its correct address and that the accompanying Form GST DRC-07 was unsigned. The Respondents included the Union of India, various GST authorities, and the State of Telangana. The Petitioner also sought interim relief to suspend the demand order and allow input tax credit.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Order-in-Original dated July 17, 2023, passed by the Principal Commissioner of Central Tax, Hyderabad GST Commissionerate, is illegal and arbitrary for being issued without notice to the petitioner's correct address and whether Form GST DRC-07 is invalid for being unsigned? (Question of law and fact turning on principles of natural justice and procedural validity under GST law). Petitioner's arguments: The Petitioner argued that the demand order was passed without proper notice to their correct address, violating principles of natural justice. They also contended that the Form GST DRC-07 was unsigned, rendering it invalid. Revenue's arguments: The Respondent authorities, represented by learned Senior Standing Counsel for CBIC, submitted that the petitioner was at liberty to prefer an appeal against the Order-in-Original and DRC-07 before the appellate authority, taking all available grounds in law and on facts.