Om Dutt Girdhar vs. Union Of INDIA & Anr.

Facts

The petitioner, Om Dutt Girdhar, challenged an order dated December 22, 2023, passed by the revenue authorities. The primary contention was that the Show Cause Notice (SCN) was not properly served or accessible. The respondents, Union of India and another, through their counsel, conceded that the SCN had been placed under the ‘Additional Notices and Orders’ tab. This concession, coupled with a prior judgment of the Court in ACE Cardiopathy Solutions (P) Ltd. vs. Union of India, formed the basis of the Court's decision regarding the final order.

Held

The Court held that the final order dated December 22, 2023, could not be sustained. This decision was based on the conceded position by the respondents that the Show Cause Notice (SCN) was placed under the ‘Additional Notices and Orders’ tab, which the Court found to be a procedural irregularity. Referencing its own judgment in ACE Cardiopathy Solutions (P) Ltd. vs. Union of India, the Court concluded that such placement would likely impede the assessee's ability to effectively respond to the notice, thus violating principles of natural justice. Consequently, the Court quashed the impugned order. However, the Court explicitly stated that this decision would not preclude the respondents from initiating fresh proceedings if permissible by law. The challenge to Notification No. 9/2023-Central Tax dated March 31, 2023, issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act/DGST Act, was expressly kept open for adjudication in separate, appropriate proceedings.

Key Issues

1. Whether the final order passed by the revenue authorities is sustainable in light of the placement of the Show Cause Notice (SCN) under the ‘Additional Notices and Orders’ tab, thereby impacting the petitioner's right to respond? (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice and procedural fairness under GST law). Contentions: Petitioner: Argued that the final order should not sustain due to the improper placement of the SCN, which prejudiced their ability to respond. They relied on the Court's previous judgment in ACE Cardiopathy Solutions (P) Ltd. vs. Union of India. Revenue/State: Conceded that the SCN was placed under the ‘Additional Notices and Orders’ tab.