Rambabu Singh vs. State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner Of State Tax

Held

The Court held that the delay in filing the appeal was sufficiently explained due to COVID-19 restrictions. Furthermore, the Court found that the orders passed were bad in law due to a violation of the principles of natural justice, as the petitioner was not afforded a fair opportunity of hearing and the orders were passed ex-parte without sufficient reasoning. The Court noted that such orders, entailing civil consequences, could be interfered with. Consequently, the Court quashed and set aside the impugned order dated 28.12.2020 passed by the Additional Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal), the order dated 05.03.2020 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax, and the notice dated 03.02.2020. The Court directed the petitioner to deposit 10% of the total demand (if not already done) and an additional 10% of the demand before the Assessing Officer within four weeks. 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. The Court explicitly stated that no opinion was expressed on the merits of the case, and all issues were left open.

Facts

The petitioner, Rambabu Singh, challenged a notice dated 03.02.2020 and subsequent orders dated 05.03.2020 and 28.12.2020, issued by the respondents (State of Bihar and its tax authorities). The notice and orders, pertaining to the tax period April 2019 to September 2019, quantified tax, interest, and penalty. The petitioner's appeal against the Deputy Commissioner's order was dismissed by the Additional Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal) solely on the grounds of delay. The petitioner contended that the delay was sufficiently explained due to COVID-19 restrictions and that the original orders were passed in violation of natural justice principles without sufficient reasons and adequate opportunity for hearing.

Key Issues

1. Whether the appeal filed by the petitioner before the Additional Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal) was barred by limitation, considering the prevailing COVID-19 restrictions, and if the delay was sufficiently explained under Section 74 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? 2. Whether the orders passed by the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax and the Additional Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal) were in violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically concerning the lack of a fair opportunity of hearing and the passing of ex-parte orders without sufficient reasoning, as contemplated under Section 74(9) of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the delay in filing the appeal was attributable to COVID-19 restrictions, which should have been considered by the appellate authority. Furthermore, the petitioner contended that the original assessment and subsequent appellate orders were passed without providing adequate time for representation and were therefore violative of natural justice. The petitioner sought to quash the impugned notice and orders. Revenue's Arguments: The learned counsel for the Revenue stated that they had no objection if the matter was remanded to the Assessing Authority for a fresh decision on merits, with no coercive steps to be taken against the petitioner during the pendency of the case. The Revenue did not contest the petitioner's claim regarding the delay being due to COVID-19 restrictions.