M/S Svs Enterprises vs. The Assistatnt Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s SVS Enterprises, a proprietorship concern providing demolition services in SEZ units, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 30.04.2024 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (LGSTO-152) for the financial year 2018-19. The petitioner contended that it was not served with the requisite notices, specifically GST ASMT 10 and the show cause notice, rendering the subsequent proceedings ex-parte and in violation of natural justice. The petitioner stated that while returns were filed on a self-assessment basis, notices demanding documents were allegedly sent to its email ID, which it claims were not received and not reflected on the GST portal. This led to the petitioner's account being frozen. The respondent, represented by the learned AGA, could not demonstrate that the notices were effectively communicated to the petitioner.
Held
The Court held that the proceedings were drawn in violation of the principles of natural justice because the respondent could not demonstrate that the notices were effectively communicated to the petitioner. The petitioner's contention that it was not served with the requisite notices, including the GST ASMT 10 and the show cause notice, was not effectively rebutted by the respondent. The Court found that the non-receipt of notices meant the petitioner was denied an opportunity to present its case, leading to an ex-parte order. Therefore, the impugned order dated 30.04.2024 was quashed. The matter was remitted back to the respondent to the stage of the show cause notice, with the petitioner directed to appear on 09.09.2025 at 02:30 p.m. for the respondent to serve the show cause notice and proceed thereafter. The ratio decidendi is that proceedings conducted without proper service of notice and an opportunity to be heard violate natural justice and are liable to be set aside.
Key Issues
1. Whether the proceedings culminating in the order dated 30.04.2024, passed under Section 73(9) of the Goods and Services Act, 2017, are vitiated by a violation of the principles of natural justice due to non-service of notice on the petitioner? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that it was not served with the GST ASMT 10 and the show cause notice, and that any notices allegedly sent to its email ID were not received and not reflected on the GST portal. Consequently, the proceedings were drawn ex-parte, violating the principles of natural justice, and the impugned order should be quashed. The petitioner relied on the fact that its account was frozen based on these flawed proceedings. Respondent's contention: The learned AGA was unable to demonstrate that the notices were communicated to the petitioner, admitting that the communications were sent via email and may not have reached the petitioner.
Sections Cited
Section 73(9)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER ACCT(LGSTO-152)/DRC-07/2023-24/ORDER-U/S 73/2023-24 DATED 30.04.2024 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT NO.1 FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2018-19 (ANNEXURE-E) IN TOTO, ON ACCOUNT OF THE FACT THAT THE PETITIONER WAS NT SERVED WITH COPIES OF THE ALLEGED ASMT-10 AND ALLEGED SHOW CAUSE NOTICE APPARENTLY ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32697 CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA
ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before this court calling in question an order dated 30.04.2024 passed by respondent No.1, which the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that notice even was not served upon the petitioner. Several other incidental orders that are passed in the aftermath of the notice so issued are also called in question.
Heard Smt. Lakshmi Menon, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Shri K. Hema Kumar, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondent.
Facts, in brief, germane are as follows: The petitioner is a proprietorship concern engaged in providing works contract services. The primary business of the petitioner is provision of demolition services in the SEZ units. The petitioner is registered with the GST on 07.07.2019. On 24.11.2023, notice in the form of GST ASMT 10 is issued by the respondent. An order later comes to be passed under Section 73(9) of the Goods and Services Act, 2017 ('the Act' for short). This is what is called in question by the petitioner on the score HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32697 that the petitioner was not issued any notice and the proceedings are drawn ex-parte against the petitioner.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that for the year 2018-2019, the petitioner has filed his returns on self assessment basis, and the respondent is said to have issued the notices demanding production of documents. All the notices were said to have been served on the email ID of the petitioner, but no communication was ever received, neither these are reflected in the GST portal. On the basis of the proceedings, the account of the petitioner is frozen. Therefore, the learned counsel submits it was a proceeding in violation of principles of natural justice. Therefore, seeks quashment of orders that are passed.
Per contra, the learned AGA is not in a position to demonstrate that the notices were communicated to the petitioner. All of which are said to have been sent through email and the communication has not reached the petitioner. Therefore, it becomes an admitted fact that the proceedings are drawn in violation of principles of natural justice and one more opportunity is required to be granted to the petitioner. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32697
In that light, I deem it appropriate to remit the matter back to the hands of the respondent from the stage of show cause notice.
For the aforesaid reasons, the following ORDER (i) The writ petition is allowed-in-part. (ii) The impugned order dated 30.04.2024 stands quashed. (iii) The matter is remitted back to the hands of the respondent, restoring it to the stage of show cause notice. (iv) The petitioner shall appear before the respondent on 09.09.2025 at 02.30 p.m. at which point in time the respondent shall serve the show cause notice upon the petitioner and regulate the procedure, thereafter. (v) All contentions other than the one considered in the course of this order of both the parties shall remain open. (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE
JY List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30/CT: BHK
Reproduced from the public record of the Karnataka High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.