T.K. Logistics vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Revenue/Wbgst And Ors.
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, T.K. Logistics, filed a writ petition challenging an adjudication order dated December 18, 2023, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Revenue/WBGST. The petitioner contended that a show cause notice dated September 8, 2023, was uploaded on the GST portal under the 'Additional Notice and Orders' tab, and they only became aware of the adjudication order after it was passed. The petitioner further argued that no personal hearing was afforded, as indicated by 'NA' in the show cause notice, and that the proceedings violated principles of natural justice. The State-respondents countered that a hard copy of the show cause notice was received, as evidenced by the adjudication order, and that the petitioner had ample opportunity to defend themselves.
Held
The Court held that the petitioner had made out a prima facie case. It found that the uploading of the show cause notice and adjudication order exclusively under the 'Additional Notice and Orders' tab, without any separate intimation to the petitioner, resulted in the petitioner being unable to reply to the same. This failure to provide adequate notice and an opportunity to be heard was deemed a violation of the principles of natural justice. Consequently, the Court quashed and set aside the adjudication order dated December 18, 2023. The Court directed the respondent No. 1 to afford the petitioner an opportunity of personal hearing and to pass a fresh, reasoned, and speaking order in accordance with the law within 12 weeks from the date of the order. The decision was to be communicated to the petitioner within a week thereafter. No other issues were expressly left undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the uploading of the show cause notice and adjudication order solely under the 'Additional Notice and Orders' tab on the GST portal, without separate intimation, constitutes a violation of the principles of natural justice, particularly concerning the petitioner's right to reply and be heard? 2. Whether the absence of a personal hearing, as indicated by 'NA' in the show cause notice, renders the subsequent adjudication order illegal and invalid? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the procedure followed violated the principles of natural justice and the prescribed statutory procedure. They contended that the limited visibility of the notices on the portal prevented them from responding adequately, and the lack of a personal hearing was a clear breach of their rights. State-respondents' arguments: The State-respondents argued that the petitioner had received a hard copy of the show cause notice and had been granted sufficient opportunities to present their case, implying that the procedural requirements were met.
Sections Cited
Section 73
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
26 15 Ct. No.10
AGM
WPA 9623 of 2024
T. K. Logistics vs. Assistant Commissioner of Revenue/WBGST, Government of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Subhasis Podder. ….for the petitioner
Mr. Prithu Dudhoria. Ms. Shruti Dutta. ….for the State-respondents
The present writ petition has been filed challenging inter alia, the legality and validity of the adjudication order dated 18.12.2023 passed by the respondent No. 1 and issue demand.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits as follows; i. That a show cause notice in Form DRC 01 dated 08.09.2023 has been issued to the petitioner demanding tax, interest and penalty. ii. That said notice has been uploaded on the GST portal under the tab ‘Additional Notice and Orders’. iii. The petitioner came to know the adjudication order dated 18.12.2023 after the order was passed. iv. There was no personal hearing afforded to your petitioner, as the same is evident from Show Cause Notice dated 8.9.2023. The column of
2 personal hearing shows ‘NA’ at page 22 of the writ petition. v. 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 vehemently opposes the submissions made by the petitioner and submits that it is an admitted fact that hard copies of the show cause notice was already received by the petitioner, which is evident from the order dated 18.12.2023being Annexure p/3 at page 26 of the writ petition. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been granted ample opportunities to defend his case.
Having heard the parties and upon perusing the records made available this Court observes as follows; i. The petitioner has been able to make out a prima facie case. ii. The fact that show cause notice and adjudication order had been uploaded only under the ‘tab Additional Notice and Orders’ and no separate intimation had been given, therefore, the petitioner was
3 unable to reply to the same. This constitutes a violation of natural justice.
In view of the above this Court directs as follows: a. The order in original passed by the respondent no. 1 dated 18.12.2023 is hereby quashed and set aside. b. Respondent no. 1 shall afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and pass a fresh reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within 12 weeks from date. Such decision shall be communicated to the petitioner 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.