M/S. Harekrushna Sahoo, Kendrapara vs. Chief Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, Cuttack

Miss Tripathy, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, impugned is order dated 27th August, 2024 made under section 73 in Odisha Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. She draws attention to preceding show cause notice dated 21st May, 2024 and order dated 27th August, 2024 and points out therefrom, her client was told that proceeding under section 73 would be initiated because it had not, inter Order No. 01. alia, furnished reply to communication by ASMT-10 dated 13th January, 2022 detail Reference no.ZD210122006022N. She demonstrates from page-18, it is disclosure of reply dated 1st May, 2022 furnished by her client with reference to the referred communication. As such, revenue could not have proceeded under section 73 without considering her client’s reply. She seeks interference.

Mr. Mishra, learned advocate, Standing Counsel appears on behalf of revenue and submits, the proceeding in which petitioner was asked to furnish reply was under section 61. Even though proceeding under section 73 was thereafter initiated overlooking petitioner’s reply, in the subsequent proceeding adequate opportunity of hearing was given to petitioner. In the circumstances, no prejudice was suffered by petitioner. The writ petition be dismissed.

Section 61, by sub-section (2) requires consideration of explanation furnished. Sub-section (3) says, in case no satisfactory explanation is furnished, the proper officer may initiate appropriate action under, inter alia, section 73. On query made Mr. Mishra could not demonstrate that in impugned order made under section 73, said reply dated 1st May, 2022 was considered.

Initiation of the proceeding under section 73 was clearly without juri iction. Impugned order is set aside and quashed. Petitioner’s said

The writ petition is disposed of.