M/S.Yazdani Steel And Power LTD.Jajpur vs. Assistant Commissioner CGST And Central Excise, Jajpur

Original PDF →
WP(C)/15818/2024HC OrissaGSTCNR ODHC01038858202404 July 2024Bench: DR. JUSTICE B.R.SARANGI,MR. JUSTICE GOURISHANKAR SATAPATHY2 pages

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
Page 1 of 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No. 15818 of 2024 M/s. Yazdani Steel And Power Ltd., Jajpur ….. Petitioner Mr. P.K. Jena, Advocate Vs. Assistant Commissioner CGST and Central Excise, Jajpur and another ….. Opposite Parties Mr. A.K. Kedia, Junior Standing Counsel, CT & GST Organization CORAM: DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI MR. JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY

ORDER 04.07.2024

Order No.

01.

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2.

Heard Mr. P.K. Jena, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr. Mr. A.K. Kedia, Junior Standing Counsel, CT & GST organization.

3.

The Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking to quash the order dated 04.04.2024 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise Jajpur Division, Jajpur in the Order-in- Original No. AC/GST/YSPL/JPR/09/2024. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner vehemently contended that impugned order has been passed without giving any opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner. Therefore, the Petitioner approached this Court by way of filing this writ petition. He is further contended that the case of the Petitioner is fully covered by the judgment of this Court in Khani Khyatigrasta Gramya Committee v. The Commissioner of Commercial Tax & GST and Another (in W.P.(C) No.27946 of 2023, disposed of on 09.11.2023).

5.

Mr. A.K. Kedia, learned Jr. Standing Counsel appearing for the Opposite Parties-Department contended that since the Petitioner has not been given opportunity of hearing, the matter has to be remanded to the authority concerned so that opportunity of hearing can be given to the Petitioner in consonance with the provision of law.

6.

Considering the contentions raised by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, but, however without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, since the impugned order dated 04.04.2024 under Annexure-1 has been passed without giving opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner, the said order cannot be sustained in the eye of law. Accordingly, the order dated 04.04.2024 is liable to be quashed and is hereby quashed. Therefore, this Court remits back the matter to the very same authority to rehear the same afresh in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner, taking into consideration the ratio decided by this Court in Khani Khyatigrasta Gramya Committee (supra).

7.

With the above observation, the writ petition stands disposed of

Arun

(DR. B.R. SARANGI) JUDGE

(G. SATAPATHY)

JUDGE

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.