M/S Mahavir Enterprises vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes Lgsto-66
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER OF ADJUDICATION IN REFERENCE NO. ACCT/LGSTO-66/ADJ- 83/2024-25 DATED 26.08.2024 AND QUASH THE SAME. (ANNEXURE A) AND ETC.,
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER
Caption petition is filed assailing the order in Form GST DRC 07 with reference No.ZD2908244092078U dated 26.08.2024 issued along with order of Adjudication in Reference NoACCT/LGSTO-66/Adj-83/2024-25 dated 26.08.2024 passed for the period between April 2019 to March 2020. 2. The primary grievance of the petitioner in the captioned writ petition is that the respondent–authority has passed the impugned adjudication order without HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22237 affording the petitioner an opportunity of personal hearing, despite the petitioner having filed a detailed reply in response to the show-cause notice issued under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, while reiterating the grounds urged in the writ petition, has specifically drawn the attention of this Court to the provisions of sub-section (4) of Section 75 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. It is contended that the said provision mandates that a personal hearing shall be granted to an assessee where a request is received or where any adverse decision is contemplated. It is submitted that the adjudicating authority, in the present case, has failed to comply with the said statutory requirement, thereby vitiating the entire adjudication proceedings.
Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate, appearing for the respondent–authority, opposes the petition and seeks to justify the impugned order. He HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22237 places reliance on paragraph 9 of the adjudication order dated 26.08.2024, wherein it is recorded that the petitioner was offered an opportunity of personal hearing on 22.07.2024. He further contends that two reminders were issued to the petitioner on 16.07.2024 and 13.08.2024, which clearly demonstrate that the authority has discharged its obligations under law.
However, the petitioner seriously disputes the issuance of the said reminders. To substantiate this claim, the petitioner has placed reliance on the Online GST Portal, more particularly, Annexure–J to the writ petition. It is submitted that the said dashboard does not reflect the issuance or communication of any reminders dated 16.07.2024 or 13.08.2024. The petitioner, therefore, asserts that there was no actual or effective communication of any such reminders and that the requirement of affording a meaningful and effective opportunity of hearing has not been fulfilled. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22237
Upon a perusal of the material placed on record, and having regard to the contents of Annexure–J, this Court finds considerable force in the submission of the petitioner. Prima facie, the dashboard does not indicate any record of the issuance of reminders as asserted by the revenue. The absence of such entries casts doubt on the claim of the authority that the petitioner was afforded an effective opportunity of hearing, as contemplated under Section 75(4) of the CGST Act, 2017. When a reply to the show-cause notice has admittedly been submitted by the petitioner, it was incumbent upon the authority to offer a personal hearing before proceeding to pass an adverse order.
In the considered view of this Court, denial of an opportunity of personal hearing, particularly in cases involving fiscal adjudication, goes to the root of the matter and amounts to violation of principles of natural justice. In order to ensure that justice is not denied on account of procedural irregularities and to enable the petitioner to HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22237 place any further material in support of its stand, this Court deems it just and appropriate to afford one more opportunity to the petitioner to respond and participate in the proceedings afresh. ORDER a. The writ petition stands allowed. b. The impugned order issued in Form GST DRC-07 bearing Reference No. ZD290824092078U dated 26.08.2024, along with the adjudication order passed in Reference No. ACCT/LGSTO-66/Adj-83/2024-25 dated 26.08.2024, are hereby quashed and set aside. c. The petitioner shall appear before the respondent– authority on 15.07.2025without expecting any further notice. d. The respondent–authority shall, upon the petitioner’s appearance, afford a reasonable opportunity of personal hearing, permit submission of any additional HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:22237 response or documentation, and thereafter pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the earlier orders now set aside. e. It is made clear that the Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case, and all contentions of the parties are left open. (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE NG List No.: 4 Sl No.: 9 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.