Nishant Raj vs. The Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court observed that the petitioner had not submitted a detailed reply to the show cause notice and was disputing certain issues, including the collection of GST at 18%. The Court noted that these disputed issues could be adjudicated before the Appellate Authority. Therefore, the petitioner was granted liberty to invoke the remedy of appeal before the Appellate Authority within two months from the date of receipt of the order. The Appellate Authority was requested to expedite the decision on the petitioner's appeal within a reasonable period of three months from the date of receipt of the appeal. The Appellate Authority was also directed to take note of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963, for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The writ petition was disposed of with these observations.

Facts

The petitioner, Nishant Raj, filed a writ petition before the Patna High Court challenging an order dated January 22, 2025, and a summary of order in Form GST DRC-07 dated January 23, 2025, issued by the Superintendent, Central Excise and CGST, Gandhi Maidan Range, Patna. The petitioner also challenged a show cause notice dated August 2, 2024, issued under Section 74(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner contended that the impugned orders and notices were without jurisdiction, as his financial turnover for the period in question did not exceed the threshold limit of Rs. 20 lakhs, as per Notification No. 10/2017-Integrated Tax dated October 13, 2017. This, according to the petitioner, exempted him from registration and compliance requirements.

Key Issues

1. Whether the order dated January 22, 2025, and the summary of order dated January 23, 2025, issued under Section 74(9) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, are without jurisdiction in light of Section 22, Section 24(i), Section 23(23), and Notification No. 10/2017-Integrated Tax dated October 13, 2017, considering the petitioner's financial turnover was below Rs. 20 lakhs. 2. Whether the show cause notice dated August 2, 2024, issued under Section 74(1) of the Central Act, 2017, is without merit in the absence of any ingredients of fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression of facts. Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the impugned orders and notices were wholly without jurisdiction because his annual turnover was below the Rs. 20 lakh threshold specified in Notification No. 10/2017-Integrated Tax, exempting him from registration and statutory compliance. He claimed to be an exempted person. He also argued that the show cause notice lacked the necessary ingredients of fraud or wilful misstatement required under Section 74. Revenue's Arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents (Union of India and its authorities).