M/S. Rabindra Surgicals PVT. LTD., Bbsr vs. Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, Cuttack

Original PDF →
WP(C)/14801/2024HC OrissaGSTCNR ODHC01041314202401 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.14801 of 2024 M/s. Rabindra Surgicals Pvt. Ltd., Bhubaneswar ….. Petitioner Mr. C. Das, Advocate Vs. Chief Commissioner, CT & GST, Cuttack and others ….. Opposite Parties Mr. A. Kedia, Jr. SC for Revenue CORAM: DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI MR. JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY

ORDER 01.07.2024

Order No.

01.

This matter is taken up by hybrid mode.

2.

Heard Mr. C. Das, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr. A. Kedia, learned Junior Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue.

3.

The Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking to quash the order dated 14.12.2023 passed by Opposite Party No.2-Assistant Commissioner, CT & GST, Circle-IV, Bhubaneswar under Section 73 of the CGST/OGST Act without granting any opportunity of personal hearing to the Petitioner and an order has been passed.

4.

Mr. C. Das, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner vehemently contended that Opposite Party No.2-Assistant Commissioner, CT & GST, Circle-IV, Bhubaneswar has passed the order dated 14.12.2023 under Section 73 of the CGST/OGST Act 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. Kedia, learned Junior Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue 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 State Tax officer while passing the order dated 14.12.2023 has not been given opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner, the said order cannot be sustained in the eye of law. Accordingly, the order dated 14.12.2023 is liable to be quashed and is hereby quashed. Therefore, this Court remits back to the very same authority to rehear the matter 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.

Subhasmita

(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.