Akanksha Enterprises Private Limited vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes

Held

The Court allowed the writ petition and quashed the impugned assessment order dated 19.10.2023 in Form GST DRC-07, passed under Section 78 of the KGST/CGST Act. This decision was made conditional upon the petitioner depositing a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- within one week from the date of the order. Furthermore, the petitioner's representative is required to appear before the respondent on 03.01.2024, without further notice, for reconsideration of the proceedings. The Court acknowledged the petitioner's grievance regarding the lack of sufficient opportunity and the respondent's agreement to reconsider the matter, provided the petitioner makes the deposit and cooperates with the proceedings. The reasoning is based on the petitioner's assertion of not being afforded a proper hearing and the respondent's willingness to re-examine the case under certain conditions.

Facts

The petitioner, Akanksha Enterprises Private Limited, filed a writ petition challenging an ex-parte assessment order in Form DRC-07 dated 19.10.2023, passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. The petitioner contended that the order was passed without providing sufficient opportunity. The respondent's order noted that notices were sent via registered post and email, and calls were made to the taxpayer. The respondent also visited the taxpayer's premises on 26.09.2023 and informed the accountant to comply. Despite this, no reply or liability discharge was made within the 30 days allowed by the SCN dated 14.09.2023. The petitioner argued that their representative had furnished some documents, which were deemed unsatisfactory, and further opportunity was not given before the order was passed under Section 78 of the KGST/CGST Act. The tax period in question is July 2017 to March 2018.

Key Issues

1. Whether the assessment order passed in Form DRC-07 dated 19.10.2023 by the respondent is an ex-parte order and if the opportunity provided to the petitioner was sufficient, turning on Section 78 of the KGST/CGST Act. Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the assessment order was ex-parte and passed without sufficient opportunity, despite their representative furnishing some documents which were deemed unsatisfactory. They also contended that a notice in Form GST DRC 13 was issued before the appeal period expired, leading to attachment of their accounts. The petitioner expressed willingness to deposit an amount exceeding Rs.10,00,000/- if proceedings were restored for reconsideration. Respondent's arguments: The respondent, through the High Court Government Pleader, submitted that notices were duly served via registered post and email, and attempts were made to contact the taxpayer. The respondent's order indicated that the taxpayer neither discharged the liability nor filed a reply within the stipulated time, suggesting no objection to the proposed liability. The respondent agreed to restoration of proceedings subject to the petitioner depositing Rs.10,00,000/- and without undermining the State's interest.