M/S Panther Security Guard Services, Thru. Proprietor Chandra Shekhar Singh vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. State Tax Deptt. Lucknow U.P. And 2 Others
Held
The Court held that the adjudication order dated 03.11.2022 was passed in violation of Section 75(4) of the GST Act, as no opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner despite them filing a detailed reply. The Court noted that the second reminder indicated 'NA' for the personal hearing date and venue, and no fresh date was fixed. Following its own previous judgments in M/s Bharat Mint and Allied Chemicals and M/s Santosh Traders, which had quashed similar orders on the ground of denial of hearing, the Court found the present case to be on similar footing. Consequently, both the adjudication order dated 03.11.2022 and the appellate order dated 10.07.2023 were quashed. The matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority to pass a fresh order after providing the petitioner with an adequate opportunity of hearing in accordance with law. The issue of limitation for the appeal was rendered moot by the quashing of the original order.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Panther Security Guard Services, challenged two orders: one dated 03.11.2022 confirming a GST demand under Section 74, and another dated 10.07.2023 dismissing their appeal as time-barred. The petitioner received a show cause notice and a first reminder fixing a reply and personal hearing date for 01.11.2021. After requesting an adjournment, a second reminder was issued on 04.08.2021, fixing the reply date as 25.02.2022, but marking the personal hearing date and venue as 'NA'. The petitioner filed a detailed reply. However, the adjudicating authority passed an order confirming the demand without granting a personal hearing, despite the reply being noted. The subsequent appeal was dismissed solely on limitation grounds.
Key Issues
1. Whether the order dated 03.11.2022, passed by the adjudicating authority, is liable to be quashed for violation of Section 75(4) of the GST Act, which mandates an opportunity of hearing, and for not fixing a date for personal hearing after the petitioner filed a reply. 2. Whether the order dated 10.07.2023, dismissing the petitioner's appeal as time-barred, is sustainable. Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the adjudication order dated 03.11.2022 is bad in law as no opportunity of hearing was granted, violating Section 75(4) of the GST Act. They argued that since the appeal was not decided on merits, the High Court can review the assessment order. Reliance was placed on the High Court's judgments in M/s Bharat Mint and Allied Chemicals vs. Commissioner of Commercial Tax and M/s Santosh Traders vs. State of U.P., which quashed assessment orders for similar violations. Respondent's arguments: The learned Standing Counsel did not record any specific arguments against the petitioner's contentions regarding the violation of Section 75(4).
Sections Cited
Section 74, Section 75(4)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:66333 Court No. - 8 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 194 of 2023 Petitioner :- M/S Panther Security Guard Services, Thru. Proprietor Chandra Shekhar Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. State Tax Deptt. Lucknow U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ankit Pande Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
Heard Dr. R. S. Pandey Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Ankit Pande the counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel.
The present petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the orders dated 03.11.2022 (Annexure no.2) whereby the demand has been confirmed against the petitioner under section 74 of the GST Act as well as the order dated 10.07.2023 whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner was dismissed as having become time barred.
In terms of the order passed by this Court on 04.10.2023, the records have been produced. On perusal of the records, it is revealed that while a show cause notice was served upon the petitioner under section 74 of the Act and in the first reminder issued to the petitioner on 04.08.2021, the date for filing the reply was fixed as 01.11.2021, the dat
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Allahabad High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.