M/S.Thoppil Agencies vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of

Held

The Court noted that the respondents' counsel had filed a memo along with the final order passed by the competent authority, which was issued pursuant to the notice that was impugned in the writ petition. In light of this development, the Court disposed of the writ petition. The petitioner was granted liberty to challenge the final order passed by the competent authority. The Court did not make any findings on the merits of the petitioner's challenge to the initial notice or the legality of the proposed tax and penalty, as the petition was disposed of based on the subsequent issuance of the final order.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Thoppil Agencies, a dealer in arecanut, filed a writ petition challenging a notice issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Enforcement-2), Hubballi. The notice, dated November 13, 2019, was issued under Section 129(3) of the CGST Act, 2017, proposing to levy tax and penalty. The petitioner contended that the notice was without jurisdiction and authority of law. During the pendency of the writ petition, the respondents' counsel filed a memo along with the final order passed by the competent authority pursuant to the impugned notice.

Key Issues

1. Whether the notice issued under Section 129(3) of the CGST Act, 2017, by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Enforcement-2), Hubballi, was without jurisdiction and authority of law, as contended by the petitioner? The petitioner argued that the notice was illegal and without jurisdiction. The respondents, represented by the HCGP, did not present any specific arguments in response to the petitioner's challenge to the notice. However, they filed a memo containing the final order passed by the competent authority subsequent to the issuance of the impugned notice.