Kuehne Nagel Private Limited vs. State Of Maharashtra And Ors
Held
The Court held that the impugned order was passed contrary to the principles of natural justice, as recognized by Section 75(4) of the CGST Act. The Court found that the petitioner's reply explicitly requested a personal hearing, and the ticking of the "No" box was an inadvertent error. A holistic reading of the reply indicated a clear intention to seek a personal hearing. The adjudicating officer adopted a mechanical approach by focusing solely on the inadvertently ticked box, failing to consider the specific request for a hearing. The Court concluded that this was not a case where the petitioner had expressly waived its right to a personal hearing. Therefore, the provisions of Section 75(4) were squarely applicable, casting an obligation on the adjudicating officer to grant an opportunity of hearing. The failure to do so rendered the impugned order in breach of natural justice and contrary to Section 75(4) of the CGST Act. The petition was allowed, the impugned order was quashed, and the respondent was directed to grant a personal hearing to the petitioner and pass an appropriate order within four weeks.
Facts
The petitioner, Kuehne Nagel Private Limited, engaged in logistics services, underwent an audit for the period 2017-18. Following the audit, a show cause notice was issued on June 7, 2023, demanding tax, interest, and penalty. The petitioner requested a 30-day extension to reply, which was not responded to. On July 11, 2023, the petitioner filed a reply seeking a personal hearing. However, on August 18, 2023, the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax (Respondent No. 3) passed an ex-parte order demanding tax of Rs. 4,65,26,248/-, interest of Rs. 5,02,48,348/-, and penalty of Rs. 46,52,625/-, without granting a personal hearing. The petitioner challenged this order before the High Court, contending it violated principles of natural justice.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned ex-parte order dated 18.08.2023, passed by the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax (Respondent No. 3), is liable to be quashed and set aside for violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically the right to a personal hearing as guaranteed under Section 75(4) of the CGST Act, 2017? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the show cause notice indicated "NA" for the date of personal hearing. Despite explicitly requesting a personal hearing in its reply dated July 11, 2023, the respondent proceeded to pass an ex-parte order without granting such a hearing. This, the petitioner contended, is contrary to Section 75(4) of the CGST Act and violative of natural justice. Respondents' arguments: The respondents argued that while the petitioner requested a personal hearing, they had ticked the box marked "No" for the option of personal hearing in their reply. They further contended that the impugned order is appealable, and therefore, the writ petition should not be entertained, and the petitioner should be relegated to the appellate remedy.
Sections Cited
Section 75(4), Section 75(5)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
wp-15210.23.doc ppn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.15210 OF 2023 Kuehne Nagel Private Limited } a company incorporated under the } Companies Act, 1956, and having its } registered office at B-1/1018, Vasant Kunj, } New Delhi – 110070 and having Branch office } Located at B-2/601, Boomerang, } Near Chandivali Studio, Chandivali Road, } Mumbai 400 072. } ...Petitioner Versus
The State of Maharashtra } Through the Secretary, } Department of Goods and Service Tax } Mantralaya, Mumbai. }
Commissioner of State Tax } GST Bhavan, Mazgaon, } Mumbai -400 010, Maharashtra. }
Deputy Commissioner of State Tax } (Bhiwandi-501), KAL-VAT-E-002 } LTU-01, Kalyan, } Cabin, 3rd Floor, Sai Vihaar Building } Above Gurudev Hotel, Kalyan West, } Station Road, Thane– 421 301 } Maharashtra. }
The Union of India } Ministry of Finance,
} ------------------------- PRACHI PRANESH NANDIWADEKAR PRANESH NANDIWADEKAR Date: 2023.12.11 11:05:22 +0530
wp-15210.23.doc Department of Revenue, } North Block, New Delhi. } ...Respondents __________ Mr. Yash Prakash i/by PDS
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Bombay High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.