M/S. Prabu Trading Company vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER In the captioned writ petition, the petitioner, a registered dealer engaged in the wholesale business of fireworks and holding GSTIN: 29AACFP1821C1ZO, has called in question the impugned order dated 20-12-2023, at Annexure- A, passed under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, contending that the said order is vitiated by gross procedural irregularity, particularly non-compliance with Rule 142 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017. 2. The petitioner submits that the impugned order has been passed ex-parte without affording any reasonable opportunity of being heard and, therefore, is in clear breach of the principles of natural justice. In support of this submission, reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Allahabad in Archita Tours and Travels v. State of U.P., reported in (2024) 24 Centax 186 (ALL), and other decisions wherein Courts have consistently held that passing an order without ensuring due and effective service of HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21294 notice amounts to a violation of the principle of audi alteram partem.
Learned Additional Government Advocate initially opposed the maintainability of the petition, contending that the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy and that the writ juri iction cannot be invoked to circumvent a reasoned adjudicatory order. However, upon perusal of the records, it is evident that the impugned order is premised on the assumption of due service solely based on electronic communication through the GST portal to the e-mail address registered by the petitioner.
While it is true that this Court, in a catena of decisions, has upheld the validity of electronic service of notices under the GST regime, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case particularly having regard to the nature of the business, the substantive rights involved, and in the interest of fairness , this Court is of the considered view that ends of justice would be better served if the petitioner is afforded an effective opportunity to participate in the proceedings before the Assessing Authority. HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21294
Accordingly, the impugned order at Annexure- A is hereby quashed. The matter stands remitted to the stage of issuance of notice under Section 73 of the CGST/SGST Act. The petitioner shall appear before the respondent-Authority on the date now fixed, i.e., 15.07.2025 and participate in the proceedings. The respondent shall thereafter adjudicate the matter afresh, in accordance with law, after providing reasonable opportunity to the petitioner.
For the foregoing reasons, this Court passes the following:
ORDER (i) The Writ Petition is hereby allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 20.12.2023, bearing Reference No. ZD291223060191P and Order No. CTO/LGSTO-040/DRC- 07/R1vsR3B/58/2023-24 issued in FORM GST DRC-07 (Annexure-A), passed by the respondent, is quashed. (iii) The matter is remitted to the Adjudicating Authority for reconsideration afresh in accordance with law. (iv) The petitioner shall appear before the Adjudicating Authority on 15.07.2025 at HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:21294
30 p.m., without awaiting any further notice, subject to payment of costs of Rs.10,000/- to the Registrar General of the High Court of Karnataka within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE
AM/List No.: 3 Sl No.: 125
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.