The Block Development Officer (Block Panchayat) vs. The Deputy Sales Tax Officer No.1

Held

The Court quashed the impugned order dated 29.08.2024 and remitted the case back to the respondent for fresh adjudication. This decision was made conditional upon the petitioner depositing 50% of the disputed tax in cash from their Electronic Cash Register within thirty days of receiving the order. Additionally, the petitioner was directed to file a reply to the Show Cause Notice dated 30.05.2024, along with supporting documents, within the same period, treating the impugned order as an addendum to the notice. The respondent is to pass a final order on merits within three months of the petitioner's compliance. The Court noted that the limitation for appeal under Section 107 had expired and the writ petition was filed late. The Court also stipulated that if the petitioner fails to comply with these conditions, the respondent can recover the tax as if the writ petition was dismissed. The respondent must provide due notice before passing any further order. The issue of the time-barred appeal was implicitly addressed by allowing de novo adjudication upon pre-deposit.

Facts

The petitioner, the Block Development Officer, challenged an order dated 29.08.2024 passed by the respondent, the Deputy Sales Tax Officer No.1. The impugned order was preceded by a Show Cause Notice dated 30.05.2024, to which the petitioner had not responded nor availed the opportunity for a personal hearing. The Writ Petition was filed on 21.08.2026, after the limitation period for filing an appeal under Section 107 of the respective GST enactments had expired. The petitioner expressed willingness to pre-deposit 50% of the disputed tax demand to facilitate a de novo adjudication.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Court should entertain a writ petition when the statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the GST enactments is available but time-barred? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that they are willing to pre-deposit 50% of the disputed tax demand as a condition for de novo adjudication, indicating a willingness to comply with procedural requirements to address the merits of the case. Respondent's contention: The respondent, through the Special Government Pleader, took notice of the petition. No specific argument was recorded for the respondent regarding the maintainability of the writ petition or the petitioner's arguments, other than acknowledging the notice.