M/S. Shree Shyam Trading Co. vs. The Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court held that the concerned authority was required to strictly adhere to Section 75(4) of the GST Act, 2017, regarding the provision of a personal hearing. Upon reviewing the show cause notice, the Court observed that the columns for the date, time, and venue of the personal hearing were marked 'NA', indicating no personal hearing was scheduled. This failure to provide a personal hearing was sufficient grounds for the petitioner to make out a case. Furthermore, the Court ruled that merely uploading proceedings on the GST portal does not suffice as valid service under Section 169 of the GST Act, 2017. It is mandatory for the official respondents to comply with at least two modes of service mentioned in Section 169. The Court found that the petitioner had made out a case on both counts, leading to the setting aside of the impugned actions. The competent authority was directed to fix a date, time, and venue for personal hearing, issue notice 15 days in advance, and proceed strictly in accordance with the GST Act, 2017, within four months.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Shree Shyam Trading Co., challenged an ex parte Assessment Order dated August 31, 2023, and a subsequent demand raised in Form DRC-07, also dated August 31, 2023, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Patna West Circle, Patna, for the Financial Year 2017-18. The petitioner contended that the order was passed without granting an opportunity of hearing as required by Section 75(4) of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax (BGST) Act, 2017, and without proper service of notice, much less a show cause notice, as mandated by Section 169 of the BGST Act, 2017. The petitioner argued that mere uploading of notices on the GST portal does not constitute valid service.

Key Issues

1. Whether the ex parte Assessment Order dated August 31, 2023, passed under Section 73(9) of the BGST Act, 2017, is liable to be quashed for violation of the principle of natural justice due to the absence of a personal hearing as contemplated under Section 75(4) of the BGST Act, 2017? 2. Whether the impugned assessment order is liable to be quashed for violation of the principle of natural justice, as the petitioner firm was not served with show cause notices or the assessment order by a valid mode of service as contemplated under Section 169 of the BGST Act, 2017? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the assessment order was passed without granting an oral hearing as required by Section 75(4) of the GST Act, 2017, and that proceedings uploaded through the portal do not constitute valid service under Section 169 of the GST Act, 2017. They contended that mere uploading of notices on the GST portal cannot be considered a valid mode of service. Respondents' Arguments: The respondents argued that the petitioner was given an option for appearance in the notice, and their failure to appear meant they had not made out a case under Section 75(4) of the GST Act, 2017. They further submitted that uploading proceedings on the portal constituted valid service and there was no violation of Section 169 of the GST Act, 2017.