Krishi Educational And Health Seva Sansthan vs. The Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court held that the notice dated February 5, 2020, and the assessment order dated March 5, 2020, were liable to be quashed. The Court found that the statutory period of 30 days mandated under Section 74(A) of the CGST/BGST Act, 2017, was not afforded to the petitioner. The notice required a reply within this period, and prior to its expiry, the assessing officer proceeded to pass an ex parte order. The Court emphasized that the mandate of law requires 30 days to be afforded to the parties, which was not done in this case. Therefore, on this ground alone, the Court quashed both the notice and the assessment order. The Court directed the assessing officer to issue a fresh notice in light of the statutory provisions and pass an appropriate order in accordance with the law. The petitioner undertook to cooperate fully in the fresh proceedings.

Facts

The petitioner, Krishi Educational and Health Seva Sansthan, filed a writ petition before the Patna High Court challenging an ex parte assessment order passed by the assessing officer. The petitioner contended that they were not afforded the mandatory statutory period of 30 days to file their reply to the notice issued by the revenue authorities. The notice dated February 5, 2020, directed the petitioner to file a reply by February 29, 2020, which was within the 30-day period. The revenue authorities proceeded to pass an order of assessment dated March 5, 2020, without granting the petitioner the full statutory period.

Key Issues

1. Whether the notice dated 05.02.2020 and the subsequent assessment order dated 05.03.2020 are liable to be quashed on the ground that the petitioner was not afforded the minimum statutory period of 30 days as mandated under Section 74(A) of the CGST/BGST Act, 2017, for filing their reply? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the assessing officer failed to adhere to the statutory mandate of providing a minimum of 30 days for filing a reply, as stipulated in Section 74(A) of the CGST/BGST Act, 2017. They asserted that the notice issued on February 5, 2020, requiring a reply by February 29, 2020, did not grant the full statutory period, rendering the subsequent ex parte assessment order illegal. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondent revenue authorities on this issue.