M/S.Flow Centric Technologies (INDIA) Private Limited vs. The State Tax Officer (St)

The challenge in the present writ petition is to the Adjudication Order in Form GST DRC-O7 under Section 73 of TGST/CGST Act, 2Ol7 , dated' 30.12.2023 passed by respondent No' 1, for the year July' 2Ol7 to March, 2018, i.e., the period immediately after the provisions of the GST Act was imPosed.

At the outset, leamed counsel for the petitioner submits that the writ petition was f-rled primarily on the ground that the impugned order dated 30.12.2023 has been passed in sheer violation of principles of natural justice. That the peLitioner has not been given a fairandreasonableopportunitytodefendhimselfbeforethe authorities concerned.

According to the learned counsel for the petitioner' the provision of law mandates the assessee to be provided reasonable opportunity of personal hearing before t.l-e order of assessment is passed. In the instant case, though the petitioner responded to the 2 show cause notices that were issued and filed their reply and other documents, no notice for personal hearing was issued to the petitioner b,:fore passing of the impugned order. Learned counsel contended t.rat the authorities themselves have not adhered to the guidelines that have been issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Excise and Customs, dated 10.O3.2017, so far as the procedures prescribed for the purpose of hearing is concerned. Referring to clause 14.3 of the said Circular, learned counsel further contended that the authorities after issuance of show cause notice and the response submitted by the assessee, was required to be given an opportunity of personal hearing.

From the admitted facfual matrix of the case, there does not seem to be rrny dispute so far as the notice for peisonal hearing having not been issued to the petitioner. In view of the said facts, we have no hesitation in reaching to the conclusion that the order under challenge in t:re present writ petition thus can be safely bought within the ambit of being violative of principles of natural justice where the petitioner has been deprived of opportunity of personal hearing before the ; mpugned order was passed, which otherwise is mandatorily lequired in terms of the Circular dated lO.O3.2Ol7. Without venttring into the merits of the case, we are inclined to set aside the imp rgned order only on this technical ground of the same being violative of principles of natural justice. Therefore, the 3 impugned order dated 30.12.2023 would stand set aside/quashed and the matter would stand remitted back to the concerned oflicer to provide an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner.

However, the petitioner is directed to appear before respondent No. 1 on 2O.O2.2O24 and for which, there will be no necessa4/ for further notice issued by the Department. The petitioner would be at liberty to make any supplementary submissions that he intends to make before the authorities concemed including the ground of juri iction of respondent No.1 proceeding with the matter and the authorities concerned are expected to consider all these facts while passing the final order. 7 . The Writ Petition to the aforesaid extent stands allowed. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions stand closed. No order as to costs. pending, if any, shall / To, . MOHD. SANAULLAH ANSARI ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //// Q ,"v SECTION OFFICER l.TheStateTaxOfficer(ST),JubileeHillslVCircle,PunjaguttaDivision' Hvderabad. 2. i6;;;;6nt commissioner (sT), Jubitee Hils-4 Circle, puniagutta Division, Hvderabad. 3. ifi; Stat;iax Officer (ST), Jubilee Hills-ll Circle, Punjagutta Division' Hyderabad. +. f6eFrincipal Secretary, Revenue (CT) Department, Secretariat' T.S.,Hyderabad. s. iwd'cbJiJ-GF ron coMMERCtAL TAXES ,Hish court for rhe state of Telanoana.at Hvderabad [OUTI o. one ct io'5nt1 SHntr JEELANI BASHA, Advocate IOPUC]

Two CD CoPies BM GJP s