M/S Gupta And Sons vs. The Union Of INDIA
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s Gupta and Sons, a proprietorship concern, filed a writ petition before the Patna High Court. The petition challenged an assessment order and an order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 09.04.2024, passed by the revenue authorities. The petitioner contended that these orders were passed without providing a personal hearing, which is a mandatory requirement under Section 75(4) of the GST enactments. The revenue authorities are the respondents. The specific tax period and the amount in dispute are not explicitly stated in the provided text. The procedural history involves the filing of the writ petition challenging the impugned orders.
Held
The Court held that the assessment order and the order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 09.04.2024, were passed in violation of the statutory mandate for a notice of personal hearing under Section 75(4) of the GST enactments. Consequently, these impugned orders were set aside. The matter was remitted back to the Assessing Officer. The petitioner was directed to appear before the Assessing Officer on 15.01.2025. If the petitioner appeared on the notified date or an adjourned date, the Assessing Officer was directed to pass fresh orders within three months from the date of the judgment or within the remaining limitation period, whichever is later, after hearing the assessee. The ratio decidendi is that a mandatory procedural requirement like a personal hearing, as stipulated in Section 75(4), must be adhered to by the revenue authorities, and non-compliance thereof warrants setting aside of the order and remitting the matter for fresh consideration.
Key Issues
1. Whether the assessment order and the order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 09.04.2024, are liable to be set aside for violation of the statutory mandate of providing a personal hearing under Section 75(4) of the GST enactments? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the impugned orders were passed without granting a personal hearing, thereby violating the mandatory provisions of Section 75(4) of the GST enactments. This procedural lapse vitiates the orders. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents (revenue authorities) on this issue. However, the court's decision implies that the revenue's actions were found to be deficient in this regard.
Sections Cited
Section 75(4)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 19-12-2024 The contentions raised in the present writ petition on limitation are answered in C.W.J.C. No. 4180 of 2024 and analogous cases, M/s Barhonia Engicon Private Limited v. The Union of India and Ors. vide judgment dated 27.11.2024,
Patna High Court CWJC No.13546 of 2024 dt.19-12-2024 2/2 against the petitioner.
It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the assessment order impugned has been passed without granting a personal hearing under Section 75(4) of the GST enactments, in which circumstance, the impugned order and the order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 09.04.2024 (Annexure P2 series), are set aside on violation of the statutory mandate for notice of personal hearing and the matter is remitted to the Assessing Officer directing the assessee to appear before the Assessing Officer on 15.01.2025. If he appears on the date notified, or on a date once adjourned, the Assessing Officer after hearing the assessee shall pass orders within three months from the date of this judgment or within the limitation period provided, if not expired, whichever falls later.
The writ petition stands disposed of with the above directions.
avinash/- (K. Vinod Chandran, CJ) (Partha Sarthy, J) AFR/NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 20.12.2024 Transmission Date N/A
Reproduced from the public record of the Patna High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.