Vijay Kumar Ram vs. State Of Bihar

Held

The Court held that the writ petition was disposed of on mutually agreeable terms, primarily due to the violation of the principles of natural justice. The Court noted two main reasons for interference: (a) violation of principles of natural justice, specifically the lack of sufficient time for the petitioner to represent their case and the ex parte nature of the orders, which entailed civil consequences; and (b) the authorities did not adjudicate the matter on the attending facts and circumstances, failing to deal with all issues of fact and law. Consequently, the Court quashed the impugned order dated 04.02.2022 passed by the Additional Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal) and the orders dated 30.11.2021, 04.02.2021, and 14.02.2021 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, along with the summary of show cause notices. The Court directed the petitioner to deposit 10% of the total amount (if not already deposited) and an additional 10% of the demand raised before the Assessing Officer within four weeks, without prejudice to their rights. The bank accounts of the petitioner were to be de-frozen immediately. 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 this period. The Court explicitly stated that it had not expressed any opinion on merits and all issues were left open.

Facts

The petitioner, Vijay Kumar Ram, filed a writ petition challenging various show cause notices and orders issued by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Danapur Circle, and an appeal order passed by the Additional Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal). The impugned orders and notices pertained to tax periods April 2019 to June 2020 and April 2020-21. The petitioner contended that the orders were passed ex parte and in violation of the principles of natural justice, with insufficient opportunity for hearing and inadequate reasoning. The revenue, through its counsel, agreed to a remand to the Assessing Authority for fresh decision on merits, without limitation issues arising, and without coercive steps against the petitioner during the pendency of the case.

Key Issues

1. Whether the ex parte orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax and the subsequent appeal order by the Additional Commissioner of State Tax are liable to be quashed for violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically the lack of adequate opportunity of hearing and insufficient reasoning. (This issue turns on principles of natural justice and potentially Section 73(9) of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017). Petitioner's contentions: The petitioner argued that the orders were passed ex parte without providing a fair opportunity to present their case. They also contended that the orders lacked sufficient reasoning to determine the tax due. The petitioner sought quashing of all impugned notices and orders. Revenue's contentions: The Revenue stated it had no objection if the matter was remanded to the Assessing Authority for a fresh decision on merits, with the understanding that limitation would not be a bar and no coercive steps would be taken against the petitioner.