BharatTaxGST

Umakanta Sahu vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs, Govt. Of INDIA

Original PDF →
WP(C)/20647/2023HC OrissaGSTCNR ODHC01050155202309 August 2023Bench: DR. JUSTICE B.R.SARANGI,MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The petitioner challenged an ex parte assessment order passed under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994, due to his inability to appear because of a medical condition. He had not filed a reply to the show cause notice.

Held

The Court set aside the ex parte assessment order and granted the petitioner one more opportunity to file a reply to the show cause notice and appear before the assessing authority for a fresh assessment.

Key Issues

Whether an ex parte assessment order passed without the petitioner's participation due to medical reasons should be set aside. Whether the petitioner should be granted an opportunity to respond to the show cause notice.

Sections Cited

Section 73(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
Page 1 of 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.20647 of 2023 Umakanta Sahu ….. Petitioner Mr. P.C. Nayak, Advocate Vs. Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs & Another ….. Opposite Parties Mr. Avinash Kedia, Jr. Standing Counsel CORAM: DR. JUSTICE B.R. SARANGI MR. JUSTICE MURAHARI SRI RAMAN

ORDER 09.08.2023 Order No.

01.

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2.

The challenge in the present writ petition is to an order dated 14.03.2023 of the Principal Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Bhubaneswar (opposite party no.2) under Section 73(1) 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 was unable to appear and did not even 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 related disease problem for which he was receiving treatment. The medical certificate has 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 14.03.2023 of Opposite party no.2, this Court directs as under:-

(i) The petitioner will first file a reply to the SCN

on or before 25.08.2023. (ii) The matter will thereafter be taken up by opposite party no.2 on 28.08.2023, 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.

(DR. B.R. SARANGI)

JUDGE

(M.S. RAMAN) JUDGE

Laxmikant

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.