Rajkumar Singh And Anr vs. The Assistant Commissioner, Asansol Charge And Ors
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioners, Raj Kumar Singh & Anr., challenged an adjudication order dated May 9, 2021, passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Asansol Charge, West Bengal Goods and Services Tax & Ors. They contended that the order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice because they were not afforded a personal hearing despite specifically requesting one in their reply to the show-cause notice dated April 13, 2021. The adjudication order itself noted that the petitioners' reply was considered, but it did not mention whether the request for a personal hearing was considered or rejected. The State's counsel could not contradict this position.
Held
The Court held that the impugned adjudication order dated May 9, 2021, was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. The Court found that although the Adjudicating Authority recorded that the petitioners' reply was considered, it failed to address or reject the petitioners' specific request for a personal hearing. The State's counsel could not refute this factual position. Consequently, the Court set aside the adjudication order. The matter was remanded back to the Adjudicating Officer to pass a fresh order after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners or their authorized representative. The Court directed that this fresh order should be passed within eight weeks from the date of communication of the order.
Key Issues
1. Whether the adjudication order dated May 9, 2021, passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Asansol Charge, West Bengal Goods and Services Tax & Ors., is liable to be set aside on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically for non-affordance of a personal hearing to the petitioners, contrary to their request in their reply to the show-cause notice? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioners argued that the adjudication order was passed in violation of natural justice as their explicit request for a personal hearing, made in response to the show-cause notice, was neither considered nor addressed by the Adjudicating Authority. They relied on the principle that a fair hearing includes an opportunity to be heard in person when requested. Revenue's Argument: The learned Additional Government Pleader for the State was unable to contradict the petitioners' assertion that no personal hearing was afforded and that their request was not considered or rejected. No specific arguments or reliance on provisions were recorded for the revenue.
Sections Cited
None explicitly mentioned in the judgment text provided, beyond the general reference to adjudication and show-cause notices.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2022 ks WPA 9561 of 2022 sl. 12 Raj Kumar Singh & Anr. Vs Assistant Commissioner, Asansol Charge, West Bengal Goods and Services Tax & Ors. Ms. Sutapa Roy Chowdhury, Mr. Abhijat Das, Ms. Aratrika Roy … For the Petitioners. Mr. A. Ray, Ld. GP., Md. T.M. Siddiqui, Mr. S. Mukherjee, Mr. N. Chatterjee … For the State. Heard learned Advocates appearing for the parties. In this writ petition, petitioners have challenged the impugned adjudication order dated 9th May, 2021 passed by the Adjudicating Authority concerned, on the ground that the same has been passed in violation of principle of natural justice by not affording opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioners in spite of specific request from the petitioners in their reply to the show-cause-notice dated 13th April, 2021 as appears at page 33 of the writ petition. On perusal of the impugned adjudiction order it appears that though the Adjudicating Authority concerned has recorded that the impugned order has been passed after considering the reply filed by the petitioners but nowhere it appers that the petitioners’ request for personal hearing was either considered or rejected.
2 Mr. Siddiqui, learned Additional Government Pleader is not in a position to contradict the aforesaid admitted position which appears from record that no personal hearing was afforded to the petitioners in spite of their request and that neither such request of the petitioner was considered nor rejected. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as appears from record and submission of the parties, the aforesaid impugned order dated 9th May, 2021 is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Adjudicating Officer concerned to pass a fresh order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners or their authorised representative within eight weeks from the date of communication of this order. With these directions and observations, this writ petition being WPA 9561 of 2022 is disposed of. ( Md. Nizamuddin, 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.