M/S Dharmendra Kumar vs. The State Of Bihar

Held

The Court noted that the petitioner had approached the High Court directly via a writ petition without first exhausting the statutory remedy available before the Appellate Tribunal. Considering the nature of the dispute and the fact that the petitioner had not first approached the Appellate Tribunal, the Court disposed of the writ application. The petitioner was granted liberty to file an appeal against the appellate order dated October 17, 2024, before the Appellate Tribunal. The Court further directed that if the appeal is filed within two weeks, the Appellate Tribunal shall consider it on its merits and decide it in accordance with the law, without raising any objection regarding the delay in filing.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Dharmendra Kumar, proprietor Sumanjay Kumar, engaged in the iron and steel rod business, filed a writ petition challenging an order passed by the Additional Commissioner (Appeal) on October 17, 2024. The petitioner contended that while notices for the appeal hearing were issued, they were only uploaded to the portal and not physically received. Consequently, the appellate order was passed ex-parte, upholding a prior assessment order dated December 5, 2023, without providing the petitioner an opportunity to be heard. The revenue suggested that the petitioner should pursue a remedy before the Appellate Tribunal.

Key Issues

1. Whether the appellate order dated October 17, 2024, passed by the Additional Commissioner (Appeal) is vitiated due to the petitioner not being afforded a proper hearing, despite notices being allegedly uploaded only to the portal and not received by the petitioner? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the appellate authority passed the order without a proper hearing, as the notices were not effectively served, leading to an ex-parte decision. The petitioner relied on the principle that a party must be given an opportunity to be heard before an adverse order is passed. Revenue's Contention: The revenue, through its counsel, suggested that the petitioner should avail the alternative remedy of appeal before the Appellate Tribunal under Section 112 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.