BharatTaxGST

M/S. Satyajit Patra, Kendrapara vs. Chief Commissioner Of CT And GST Odisha, Cuttack

Original PDF →
WP(C)/7124/2025HC OrissaGSTCNR ODHC01016886202518 March 2025Bench: MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA (ACJ),MR. JUSTICE M.S.SAHOO3 pages

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
Page 1 of 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.7124 of 2025 M/s. Satyajit Patra, Kendrapara …. Petitioner Represented By Adv. – Ms. I. Tripathy, Advocate -versus- Chief Commissioner of CT and GST, Odisha, Cuttack and others …. Opposite Parties Represented By Adv. – Mr. S. Das, ASC CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA, THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. SAHOO Order No.

ORDER 18.03.2025

01.

1. Ms. Tripathy, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner. Ms. Tripathy submits, under challenge is demand notice dated 6th April, 2024 issued by the State Tax Officer pertaining to financial year 2018-19 issued under section 73 of Odisha Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. She draws attention to notice dated 6th July, 2021 to point out, in it there was direction to file reply as well as for personal

hearing on dates and times mentioned in the table. Referring to the table she demonstrates, only date of filing show cause was given. Date for personal hearing was not given. It amounted to violation of principles of natural justice. On query made she submits, reply to the show cause could not be submitted because of the pandemic.

2.

Mr. Das, learned advocate, Additional Standing Counsel appears on behalf of revenue and submits, a reminder was also given to file reply. It was presumed, on filing reply there may arise necessity of personal hearing, if at all. Otherwise, omission to file reply would mean the assessee has no defence to the demand. He relies on sub- section (4) in section 75. 3. Petitioner is relying on directions given in the show cause notice. It was in respect of a demand. Any defect in the show cause notice would cause violation of principles of natural justice. On query made Mr. Das in fairness submits, time be extended for petitioner to file reply and thereafter in event personal hearing is sought, it will be given.

4.

In view of aforesaid, impugned demand is set aside and quashed. Petitioner has two weeks from date to file reply to the show

cause. In event it does file reply, in it request may be made for personal hearing or separately thereafter. In event the reply is not filed as directed, impugned order will stand automatically restored.

5.

The writ petition is disposed of.

(Arindam Sinha)

Acting Chief Justice

(M.S. Sahoo)

Judge Jyoti

Reproduced from the public record of the Orissa High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.