M/S Sabita Das vs. Principal Commissioner, CGST, Bbsr

Questioning the propriety of common order dated 24.01.2025 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), GST, Central Excise and Customs, Bhubaneswar in Appeal No.295/ST/BBSR-GST/2024, the Petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing this writ petition by invoking provisions under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India.

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that non- appearance of the respondent before the Appellate Authority led to disposal of appeal against the Petitioner. No reason whatsoever has been stated in the common order passed in the appeals. It is arduously urged that despite non-appearance of the respondent, the Appellate Authority should have to assigned reason with respect to each ground of appeal of the Department. By simply conceding to the review order, the order of the Appellate Authority is rendered vitiated and the Appellate Authority could not have shirk his responsibility to determine the issues raised by the Department on its merit.

It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that due to unavoidable reason, the respondent could not attend the personal hearing as scheduled to be held by the Appellate Authority. Placing reliance on the judgment dated 05.05.2025 of this Court in the case of M/s. Pacific International Private Limited vs. Commissioner (Appeal) and others, in W.P.(C) No.9943 of 2025, he submitted that under similar circumstances when the Appellate Authority has allowed the appeals preferred by the Department based on review order, this Court showed indulgence and set aside the matter for fresh adjudication granting liberty to the Petitioner to have its say.

Mr. Choudhury Satyajit Misra, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the GST, Central Excise and Customs sought to stand by order passed by the Appellate Authority and submitted that the respondent did not choose to avail the opportunity of personal hearing. The respondent cannot plead advantage on its own mistake. The order has been passed by the Appellate Authority and there was no necessity to assign separate reasons when review order has the sufficient reason mentioned therein.

This Court does not accede to the submission of the learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Opposite Parties. The Appellate Authority is required to apply his independent mind on each ground of appeal taken by the Department in the appeal, even

For availing opportunity of hearing, the petitioner is directed to appear before the Appellate Authority not later than 26.05.2025 with the copy of this Order. The petitioner is at liberty to furnish any response to the Appeal of the Revenue by the said date and take such plea(s) as is available under the law.

In the event of appearance of the petitioner on the said date before the Commissioner (Appeals), Goods and Service Tax, Central Excise & Customs, Bhubaneswar-opposite party No.1, the Authority is free to proceed with the appeal for hearing on the said date or fix any other suitable date(s) for hearing.

It is needless to say that, the petitioner shall not be granted unnecessary adjournments. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any view or opinion on the merit of the appeal. The facts narrated and the observations made herein are for the purpose of considering the aspect of adherence to the principles of natural justice.

As a consequence of above observations made and directions issued, the writ petition stands disposed of, but in the circumstances there shall be no order as to costs.

As a result of the disposal of the writ petition, all pending interlocutory applications, if any, shall stand disposed of. (Harish Tandon) Chief Justice