M/S Dar Motors Private Limited vs. Union Territory Of J And K And Ors. (Finance Department)

Held

The Court held that the Appellate Authority had not provided sufficient opportunity to the Appellant to pursue their appeal as warranted under law. It was also found that no finding was returned in relation to the grounds agitated in the appeal, which resulted in a violation of the mandate of the principle of natural justice. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned order dated February 4, 2022, passed by the Appellate Authority. The Court further directed the Appellate Authority to consider the matter afresh in accordance with the mandate of the J&K GST Act, 2017, after hearing both parties, including the Appellant. No specific finding was made on the contention regarding Section 169, as the matter was remanded on grounds of natural justice and opportunity.

Facts

M/s Dar Motors Private Limited (Petitioner) filed a writ petition challenging an order dated February 4, 2022, passed by the Appellate Authority. This order dismissed the Petitioner's appeal against an order dated December 29, 2020, passed by the State Taxes Officer, Circle Kulgam (Assessing Authority). The Petitioner contended that the Appellate Authority dismissed their appeal based on available records without proper assistance and without providing sufficient opportunity for hearing. Furthermore, the Petitioner argued that the impugned order was issued in violation of Section 169 of the J&K GST Act, 2017, as no prior notice was served. The Respondents, represented by the Government Advocate, supported the impugned order, asserting that adequate opportunity of hearing was granted.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Appellate Authority provided sufficient opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner before passing the impugned order, in violation of the principles of natural justice, as contemplated under the J&K GST Act, 2017? 2. Whether the impugned order passed by the Appellate Authority is vitiated by a procedural irregularity, specifically the alleged non-issuance of prior notice as envisaged under Section 169 of the J&K GST Act, 2017? Petitioner's Contentions: The Petitioner argued that the Appellate Authority failed to provide adequate opportunity of hearing and that the impugned order was passed without proper assistance. They also contended that the order was issued in violation of Section 169 of the Act, as no prior notice was served. The Petitioner relied on the principles of natural justice. Respondents' Contentions: The Respondents vehemently supported the impugned order, stating that the Petitioner was afforded adequate opportunity of hearing by the Appellate Authority before the order was passed.