M/S. Shreemukh Developers vs. The State Tax Officer- 1 (St)

Held

The Court held that the impugned show cause notice dated 13.06.2024 is liable to be set aside on the ground that it lacks a physical or digital signature. This finding is based on the consensus between the parties and the precedent set by this Court in W.P. No. 8014 of 2024, where a similar notice was quashed for the same reason. The Court reasoned that the absence of a valid signature renders the notice procedurally flawed and violative of principles of natural justice. The ratio decidendi is that a show cause notice issued under GST law must bear a valid signature to be legally tenable. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned show cause notice, reserving liberty to the Department to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law from the appropriate stage. The petitioner was also granted liberty to take all possible defenses and objections if put to notice by the competent authority. No specific amount in dispute was recorded.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Shreemukh Developers, filed a writ petition before the High Court for the State of Telangana challenging a show cause notice (SCN) issued by the State Tax Officer-1 (ST), Punjagutta Division. The SCN, bearing DIN GST/AD3606240168605124111 and dated 12.06.2024, was issued in Form DRC-01 with reference number 2D3606240319818 dated 13.06.2024. The petitioner sought to declare the SCN as void, arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction, and violative of principles of natural justice and constitutional provisions. The respondents included the State Tax Officer, Central Tax authorities, the State of Telangana, and the Union of India. The petitioner also sought an interim stay on the operation of the SCN.

Key Issues

1. Whether the show cause notice dated 13.06.2024, issued by the 1st Respondent under the provisions of the CGST/TGST Act, 2017, is void, arbitrary, illegal, without jurisdiction, and violative of the principles of natural justice and Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 265 of the Constitution of India? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the impugned show cause notice lacks a physical or digital signature, rendering it void and illegal. They relied on a previous order of this Court in W.P. No. 8014 of 2024, which set aside a similar notice on the same grounds. Revenue's Contention: The respondents, represented by their respective counsels, fairly submitted that the impugned show cause notice does not contain any physical or digital signature. They agreed that the matter could be disposed of in terms of the order passed in W.P. No. 8014 of 2024.