M/S Radhagobinda Market Complex, Mayurbhanj vs. Commn Central GST And Central Excise Sundargarh

Original PDF →
WP(C)/7610/2024HC OrissaGSTCNR ODHC01022259202403 April 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.7610 of 2024 M/s. Radhagobinda Market Complex, Mayurbhanja ….. Petitioner Mr. P.C. Nayak, Advocate Vs. The Commissioner of Central GST & Central Excise, Sundargarh and others ….. Opposite Parties Mr. A. Kedia, Jr. SC for Revenue CORAM: DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI MR. JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY

ORDER 03.04.2024

Order No.

01.

This matter is taken up by hybrid mode.

2.

The challenge in the present writ petition is to an order dated 19.07.2023 of the Deputy Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Keonjhar (opposite party no.2) under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 along with interest and penalty for the tax period 2015-16 & 2016-17. 3. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that it was passed ex parte. In fact, the petitioner did not file a reply to the Show Cause Notice (SCN) issued to him preceding the above assessment order.

4.

In the petition, the petitioner has explained how he was suffering from Hypertension & IHD for which he was receiving treatment. The medical certificates have also been enclosed under Annexure-2. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that the petitioner ought to be given one more chance to first reply to the SCN and then appear before the assessing authority for a fresh assessment order to be passed in accordance with law.

6.

Accordingly, while setting aside the impugned assessment order dated 19.07.2023 of opposite party no.2, this Court directs as under:- (i) The petitioner will first file a reply to the SCN on or before 15.04.2024. (ii) The matter will thereafter be taken up by opposite party no.1 on 18.04.2024, and after hearing the petitioner, a fresh assessment order shall be passed within a period of two months thereafter. If aggrieved by such order, it will be open to the petitioner to seek appropriate remedies in accordance with law.

7.

The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.

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.