R And G Engineering Construction Jv And Anr. vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioners, R AND G ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION JV AND ANR., filed a writ petition challenging an adjudication order dated 08.02.2024 passed by Respondent No. 3. The petitioners contended that a show cause notice dated 09.12.2023 was issued and uploaded only on the GST portal under the 'Additional Notice and Orders' tab, without any separate intimation. Consequently, they were unaware of the notice and could not respond. They only learned about the adjudication order when a DRC-13 notice was issued on 09.12.2025. The petitioners argued that the proceedings and the impugned order violated principles of natural justice and statutory procedure. The State respondents opposed the petition, asserting that the petitioners had ample opportunities to defend their case and that their appeal was rightly dismissed on limitation.
Held
The Court held that the petitioners had made out a prima facie case. It observed that the show cause notice was only uploaded under the 'Additional Notice and Orders' tab, and no separate intimation was given to the petitioners. This failure to provide adequate intimation constituted a violation of the principles of natural justice. Consequently, the Court quashed and set aside the adjudication order dated 08.02.2024 and the consequential bank attachment in FORM DRC-13 dated 09.12.2025. Respondent No. 3 was directed to revisit the issue by considering the grounds taken in the petitioners' appeal on merits. The respondent was further directed to afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass a fresh reasoned adjudication order in accordance with law within 12 weeks from the date of the order, with communication of the decision to the petitioners within a week thereafter. The Court found interference warranted in the ends of justice due to the peculiar facts of the case.
Key Issues
1. Whether the adjudication order dated 08.02.2024, passed by Respondent No. 3, is illegal and invalid due to a violation of the principles of natural justice and due compliance with the procedure prescribed under the GST Act? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioners argued that the show cause notice was uploaded only on the GST portal under the 'Additional Notice and Orders' tab, and no separate intimation was provided. This lack of proper communication prevented them from responding to the notice, leading to a violation of natural justice. They further contended that the entire proceedings and the impugned order were contrary to law and statutory procedure. Revenue/State's Arguments: The State respondents argued that the petitioners had been granted ample opportunities to defend their case, and therefore, their appeal was rightly dismissed on the grounds of limitation. They did not specifically address the contention regarding the mode of service of the show cause notice.
Sections Cited
DRC-01, DRC-13
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2026
Court No.10
DL/Item No.–27
[Milan] ….for the Petitioners
Ms. Prithu Dudhoria, Ms. Sruti Datta
….for the State/Respondent
Affidavit of service filed in Court today be kept with the record.
The present petition has been filed challenging inter alia, the legality and validity of the adjudication order dated 08.02.2024 passed by the respondent No.3. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits as follows; i. That a show cause notice in Form DRC 01 No. ZD1912230447881 dated 09.12.2023 has been issued to the petitioners demanding tax, interest and penalty. ii. That said notice has been uploaded on the GST portal under the tab ‘Additional Notice and Orders’. Due to this, the petitioners did not get any actual intimation and hence could not respond to the show cause notice.
2 iii. That the petitioners came to know about the adjudication order dated 08.02.2024 only after DRC-13 was issued on 09.12.2025. iv. That the entire proceedings and the impugned order are contrary to law and have been passed in violation of principles of natural justice and without due compliance with the procedure prescribed under the said Act.
Learned counsel appearing for the State respondents opposed the writ petition and submitted since the petitioners have been granted ample opportunities to defend their case, the appeal has been rightly dismissed on limitation.
Having heard the parties and upon perusing the records made available this Court observes as follows; i. The petitioners have been able to make a prima facie case. ii. The fact that show cause notice has been only uploaded under the ‘tab Additional Notice and Orders’ and no separate intimation has been given therefore the petitioners have been unable to reply to the same. This constitutes a violation of natural justice.
Considering the peculiar facts of the case, interference by this Court is warranted in ends of justice.
In view of the above this Court directs as follows:
3 a. The adjudication order dated 08.02.2024 is hereby quashed and set aside. The consequential bank attachment in FORM DRC- 13 dated 09.12.2025 is also hereby quashed and set aside. b. Respondent no.3 is directed to revisit the issue by considering the grounds taken in appeal preferred by the petitioners on merits. c. Respondent no.3 shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and pass a fresh reasoned adjudication order in accordance with law within 12 weeks from date. Such decision shall be communicated to the petitioners within a week thereafter.
With the above observations and directions this writ petition stands disposed of.
Since no affidavit in opposition has been called for, the allegations contained in the writ petition are deemed to have been denied and not admitted.
Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible. (Smita Das De, J.)
Reproduced from the public record of the Calcutta High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.