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

Held

The Court held that the impugned order dated March 5, 2020, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Taxes under Section 73 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, was bad in law due to a violation of the principles of natural justice. The Court found that the petitioner was not afforded a fair opportunity of hearing and that the order was passed ex parte without sufficient reasons. Consequently, the Court quashed and set aside the impugned order. The Court also directed the de-freezing/de-attachment of the petitioner's bank accounts. The petitioner was directed to deposit an additional ten percent of the demand raised before the Assessing Officer within four weeks, without prejudice to their rights. The Assessing Officer was directed to pass a fresh order after affording adequate opportunity to all concerned, including the petitioner, and to decide the matter on merits expeditiously, preferably within two months of 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. Liberty was reserved for the petitioner to challenge the fresh order and for parties to pursue other available remedies.

Facts

The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging an order dated March 5, 2020, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Taxes, Sasaram Circle, Sasaram, under Section 73 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner also sought the de-attachment of their bank accounts, which were attached post the impugned order. The Revenue contended that the petitioner had an alternative efficacious remedy of filing an appeal under the Act. The Court noted that the impugned order was passed ex parte and without sufficient reasons, violating the principles of natural justice. The petitioner confined their relief to specific prayer clauses, reserving others for future proceedings.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned order dated March 5, 2020, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Taxes under Section 73 of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, is bad in law due to violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically the right to a fair opportunity of hearing? 2. Whether the ex parte nature of the order, lacking sufficient reasons for determining the amount due, warrants interference by this Court despite the availability of an alternative statutory remedy? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the impugned order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, as they were not afforded sufficient time to represent their case. They also contended that the order was passed ex parte and lacked adequate reasoning, leading to civil consequences. Therefore, the Court should interfere despite the statutory remedy. Revenue's arguments: The Revenue argued that the petitioner had an equally alternative efficacious remedy of filing an appeal under the provisions of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and thus the writ petition was not maintainable.