Pamm Advertising And Marketing vs. The Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court quashed and set aside the impugned order dated 10.02.2021 passed by the Additional Commissioner (Appeal) and the order dated 05.03.2020 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Taxes, including the summary of order in Form GST DRC-07. The Court found the original order to be bad in law due to a violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically the lack of a fair opportunity of hearing and insufficient time afforded to the petitioner. The Court also noted that the order was passed ex parte without sufficient reasons for determining the amount due. The Court accepted the petitioner's statement that 10% of the total amount had been deposited as a prerequisite for hearing the appeal, and directed the petitioner to deposit an additional 10% of the demand within four weeks. The Court also directed the de-freezing of the petitioner's bank accounts. The matter was remanded to the Assessing Authority to decide the case on merits after complying with the principles of natural justice, affording adequate opportunity to all parties, and passing a speaking order within two months. The Court explicitly stated that it had not expressed any opinion on merits and all issues were left open.

Facts

The petitioner, Pamm Advertising and Marketing, through its proprietor Sri Sunil Chabra, challenged an order dated 05.03.2020 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Taxes, Patna, imposing a tax, interest, and penalty of Rs. 12,93,772/- for the period April 2019 to October 2019, under Section 74 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner's appeal against this order was dismissed by the Additional Commissioner (Appeal) State Taxes, Patna East Circle, vide an order dated 10.02.2021. The petitioner contended that the appellate order was passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice, as their points were not considered. The revenue, represented by the Additional Solicitor General, agreed to a remand for fresh decision on merits without limitation issues, and without coercive steps.

Key Issues

1. Whether the appellate order dated 10.02.2021, passed by the Additional Commissioner (Appeal) State Taxes, Patna East Circle, is liable to be set aside for gross violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically for failing to consider the points raised by the petitioner? Petitioner's Arguments: - The appellate order was passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice, as the points raised by the petitioner were not considered. Reliance was placed on Kranti Associates (P) Ltd. Versus Masood Ahmad (2010) and Naresh Bhai Bhagu Bhai Versus The Union of India (2019). Revenue's Arguments: - The revenue had no objection if the matter was remanded to the Assessing Authority for deciding the case afresh. They agreed that limitation would not be an impediment and the case would be decided on merits. They also agreed that no coercive steps would be taken against the petitioner during the pendency of the case.