Bharat Mint And Allied Chemicals vs. Commissioner Commercial Tax And 2 Others

WTAX/1037/2021HC AllahabadGSTCNR UPHC01191323202103 March 20221 pages

For Petitioner: Abhinav Mehrotra, Satya Vrata MehrotraFor Respondent: C.S.C., A.S.G.I., Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani, J., Hon'ble Jayant Banerji, J., Heard Sri Abhinav Mehrotra, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing

AI SummaryAllowed

Facts

The petitioner, Bharat Mint And Allied Chemicals, filed a writ petition challenging an Order of Adjudication dated 09.11.2021, passed by the Revenue authorities. The petitioner contended that the order was passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice, as no oral hearing was afforded, and adverse material was not confronted. The petitioner also argued that the order disregarded judicial discipline and failed to meet the mandate of law under Section 74(2) of the GST Act. The tax period in dispute was April 2018 - March 2019. The petitioner sought to set aside the order and for the authorities to reconsider the case lawfully after providing an opportunity of hearing.

Held

The Court allowed the writ petition in terms of a previous judgment passed in WRIT TAX No. - 1029 of 2021. The impugned order dated 09.11.2021, pertaining to the tax period April 2018-March 2019, was quashed. The Court granted liberty to the respondents to pass a fresh order in accordance with the law, after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. The reasoning implicitly accepted the petitioner's contention regarding the violation of natural justice and the mandate of law, as the order was quashed and a fresh opportunity for hearing was directed. The ratio is that orders passed without affording a proper opportunity of hearing and without adhering to statutory requirements, particularly concerning natural justice, are liable to be quashed.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Order of Adjudication dated 09.11.2021 is liable to be set aside for gross violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically for not affording an oral hearing and not confronting adverse material to the petitioner, as contemplated under the GST Act? 2. Whether the Order of Adjudication dated 09.11.2021 was made in disregard to judicial discipline and without meeting the mandate of law as contained under Section 74(2) of the GST Act? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the impugned order was passed in gross violation of natural justice principles, citing the lack of oral hearing and non-confrontation of adverse material. They further contended that the order disregarded judicial discipline and failed to comply with Section 74(2) of the GST Act. The petitioner sought a fresh consideration of their case after a lawful process including a personal hearing and supply of relied-upon documents. Revenue's Arguments: The judgment records a joint statement by both learned counsels that the controversy is covered by a previous judgment of the Court in a similar case. No specific arguments were recorded for the revenue beyond this joint submission.

Sections Cited

Section 74(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 1037 of 2021 Petitioner :- Bharat Mint And Allied Chemicals Respondent :- Commissioner Commercial Tax And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhinav Mehrotra,Satya Vrata Mehrotra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,A.S.G.I. Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J. Hon'ble Jayant Banerji,J. 1. Heard Sri Abhinav Mehrotra, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for the State – respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed praying for the following relief: "1. The Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of CERTIORARI, calling for the Record of proceedings from Revenue and to thereafter be further pleased to set-aside and quash the IMPUGNED Order of Adjudication Dt. 09.11.2021 [ANNEXURE NO.7] and connected demand of tax which is made is gross violation of the principles of natural Justice; NO oral hearing in the matter was afforded to Petitioner, adverse material has not been confronted to Petitioner resulting in a most UNFAIR TRIAL. 2. The Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of CERTIORARI to set aside and quash the IMPUGNED Order of Adjudication Dt. 09.11.2021 which is made is gross disregard to Judicial Discipline and without meeting the mandate of Law as contained under Section 74(2) of the GST Act. 3. The Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of MANDAMUS commanding Revenue authorities to reconsider the case of the Petitioner, lawfully and in good-faith, in the light of submissions filed by Petitioner, and with supplying of relied upon documents and after affording due and proper opportunity of hearing." Both the learned counsels for the parties jointly state that the controversy involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment dated 04.03.2022, passed today in WRIT TAX No. - 1029 of 2021 (Bharat Mint And Allied Chemicals Vs. Commissioner Commercial Tax And 2 Others) and, therefore, the present writ petition may also be allowed

in terms of the aforesaid judgment.

In view of the statement of learned counsels for the parties as aforenoted, the writ petition is allowed in terms of the judgment passed in WRIT TAX No. - 1029 of 2021 (Bharat Mint And dated 9.11.2021 for the tax period April 2018- March 2019 is hereby quashed.

Liberty is granted to the respondents to pass an order afresh in accordance with law, after affording opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner.

Order Date :- 4.3.2022/vkg GOSWAMI Date: 2022.03.09 09:46:18 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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.