M/S Pramod Khad Bhandar vs. The Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court held that it was not precluded from interfering with the order despite the existence of a statutory remedy, as the order appeared ex facie bad in law. This conclusion was based on two primary reasons: (a) violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically the lack of a fair opportunity of hearing and insufficient time afforded to the petitioner to present their case; and (b) the ex parte order lacked sufficient reasoning to justify the determination of the amount due and payable by the assessee. Consequently, the Court quashed and set aside the impugned order dated March 5, 2020, passed under Section 73 of the State Act. The Court directed the petitioner to deposit an additional ten percent of the demand raised within four weeks, without prejudice to the parties' rights. The bank accounts of the petitioner were ordered to be de-attached immediately. The Assessing Officer was directed to afford adequate opportunity to all concerned, including the petitioner, and pass a fresh order on merits expeditiously, preferably within two months from the petitioner's appearance. The Court explicitly stated that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and all issues were left open.

Facts

The petitioner filed a writ petition before the Patna High Court challenging an order dated March 5, 2020, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Taxes, Sasaram Circle. The petitioner also stated that their bank accounts had been attached post the impugned order. The Revenue contended that the petitioner had an alternative remedy of filing an appeal under the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner confined their relief to specific prayer clauses, reserving liberty to press other prayers later. The Court noted that the impugned order was passed ex parte and without sufficient reasons, violating principles of natural justice.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned order dated March 5, 2020, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Taxes, Sasaram Circle, is bad in law due to violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically the right to a fair opportunity of hearing, and lack of sufficient reasoning, thereby warranting interference by this Court despite the availability of an alternative statutory remedy under the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the order was passed ex parte, without affording sufficient time for representation and without adequate reasons, leading to civil consequences. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue argued that the petitioner has an equally alternative efficacious remedy of filing an appeal under the provisions of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.