Vikash Kumar vs. The State Of Bihar
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Vikash Kumar, challenged an assessment order (Annexure-P/1) passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Teghra Circle, Begusarai. The petitioner contended that the order was passed beyond the prescribed limitation period and that a personal hearing was not afforded. The assessment pertains to the year 2017-18. The original limitation period for assessment under Section 73(10) of the BGST Act, 2017, was three years from the due date of filing returns, which was December 31, 2018, expiring on December 31, 2021. An extension of the due date to February 7, 2020, shifted the normal limitation to February 7, 2023. However, the State Government, through notifications, extended the last date for passing orders under Section 73(9) to September 30, 2020, and later to December 31, 2023. The impugned order was passed on November 27, 2023, within this extended period. The petitioner filed the writ petition on September 20, 2024, long after the statutory period for filing an appeal had expired.
Held
The Court held that the assessment order was not barred by limitation. It noted that the original limitation period was extended by government notifications, and the assessment order dated November 27, 2023, was passed within the extended period up to December 31, 2023. The Court relied on a previous judgment in C.W.J.C. No. 4180 of 2024, M/s Barhonia Engicon Private Limited v. The State of Bihar and Others, which upheld such extensions. Regarding the personal hearing, the Court found no violation of Section 75(4) of the BGST Act, as the order explicitly mentioned a personal hearing was granted on September 28, 2023, to which the petitioner did not respond. The Court also observed that the writ petition was filed on September 20, 2024, long after the statutory period for filing an appeal (which would have expired around February 27, 2024) had lapsed. Therefore, the Court found no reason to permit the filing of an appeal, which is not permissible under the statute in such circumstances. The Court found no reason to interfere with the assessment order on the grounds raised by the petitioner.
Key Issues
1. Whether the assessment order dated November 27, 2023, was passed within the period of limitation prescribed under Section 73(10) of the BGST Act, 2017, considering the extensions granted by the State Government through notifications. Petitioner's argument: The petitioner argued that the assessment order was barred by limitation. Revenue's argument: The revenue contended that the order was passed within the extended limitation period as per the relevant notifications. 2. Whether a personal hearing was afforded to the petitioner as required under Section 75(4) of the BGST Act, 2017. Petitioner's argument: The petitioner claimed that no personal hearing was granted. Revenue's argument: The revenue pointed to the assessment order itself, which stated that a personal hearing was granted on September 28, 2023, and the petitioner did not respond. 3. Whether the petitioner is entitled to file an appeal after the statutory period for filing an appeal has expired, given that the writ petition was filed significantly late.
Sections Cited
Section 73(10), Section 73(9), Section 75(4)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 4 09-12-2024 The petitioner is aggrieved with the order passed at Annexure-P/1 on two counts, one on the ground of limitation and also on the ground of personal hearing having not been afforded.
The assessment year is 2017-18 and as per the provision under BGST Act, 2017 being Section 73(10), an assessment has to be completed within 3 years from the due 2/3 date of filing of returns. The due date of filing of returns was the 31st of December of the relevant year. Hence, counted from 31.12.2018, the limitation expires on 31.12.2021. However, the date of filing of returns was extended to 07.02.2020. As per the said extension, the limitation for assessment would have normally expired on 07.02.2023. The State Government then by Notification S.O. No.174 dated 29.08.2022, on the recommendation of the GST Council extended the last date for passing an order under Section 73(9) to 30.09.2020 and later by Notification No. S.O. No.134 dated 17.05.2023 to 31.12.2023. Annexure- P/1 assessment order, challenged herein, was passed on 27.11.2023 within the extended limitation period. The challenge against the extension of limitation was negatived by judgment dated 27.11.2024 in C.W.J.C. No. 4180 of 2024, M/s Barhonia Engicon Private Limited v. The State of Bihar and Others and analogous cases. We find absolutely no reason to interfere with the assessment order on the ground of limitation.
The other contention raised is of no personal hearing having been afforded. In fact, the order specifically 3/3 speaks of a personal hearing having been granted on 28.09.2023, to which the petitioner did not respond to. In such circumstances, there is no violation of Section 75(4) of the BGST Act.
Faced with the situation, the learned Counsel for the petitioner sought for filing an appeal. We see that the order itself was passed on 27.11.2023 and the petitioner had a time of 3 months to file an appeal without delay and a further time of 1 month to file an appeal with sufficient explanation for the delay occasioned. Hence, an appeal ought to have been filed before 27.02.2024. The writ petition itself was filed long after that, on 20.09.2024. In such circumstances, we do not see any reason to pass an order enabling the petitioner to file an appeal which is not permissible, as per the statute.
The writ petition, hence, stands dismissed.
sharun/- (K. Vinod Chandran, CJ) ( Partha Sarthy, J) U
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.