M/S. Aditya Polytechnic Private Limited vs. The State Of Bihar

Held

The Court quashed and set aside the impugned order dated March 18, 2020, passed by the Additional Commissioner of State Tax (Appeals), and the order dated July 9, 2019, passed by the Joint Commissioner of State Tax, along with the summary of order dated August 10, 2019. The Court found that the ex parte orders were passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, as the petitioner was not afforded a fair opportunity of hearing and the orders did not provide sufficient reasoning for the determination of the amount due. The Court accepted the petitioner's statement that 96% of the total amount had been deposited and directed the petitioner to deposit the remaining 4% within four weeks. The bank accounts of the petitioner were ordered to be de-frozen. The Assessing Authority was directed 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 of the petitioner's appearance. No coercive steps were to be taken against the petitioner during the pendency of the proceedings. The Court explicitly stated that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case, leaving all issues open.

Facts

M/s. Aditya Polytechnic Private Limited (the petitioner) filed a writ petition challenging an order dated March 18, 2020, passed by the Additional Commissioner of State Tax (Appeals), Patna. This order rejected the petitioner's appeal against an order dated July 9, 2019, passed by the Joint Commissioner of State Tax, Gandhi Maidan Jurisdiction, Patna. The appeal was rejected solely on the grounds of being barred by limitation. The original order by the Joint Commissioner and the summary of order dated August 10, 2019, for the month of April 2019, were both ex parte. The petitioner argued that the delay in filing the appeal was due to COVID-19 restrictions and that the ex parte orders lacked sufficient reasoning.

Key Issues

1. Whether the appeal filed by the petitioner before the Additional Commissioner of State Tax (Appeals) was barred by limitation, considering the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions, and if the delay was sufficiently explained? (Question of fact and law, turning on principles of natural justice and procedural fairness). 2. Whether the ex parte orders passed by the Joint Commissioner of State Tax and the subsequent appellate order were in violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically the right to a fair opportunity of hearing and the requirement for reasoned orders? (Question of law, turning on principles of natural justice and administrative law). Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner contended that the delay in filing the appeal was attributable to the COVID-19 restrictions, which prevented them from effectively pursuing their case. They also argued that the ex parte orders were passed without affording them a sufficient opportunity to be heard and lacked adequate reasoning to justify the demand, thus violating principles of natural justice. Revenue's Arguments: The Revenue stated it had no objection if the matter was remanded to the Assessing Authority for a fresh decision on merits.