M/S. Shree Vinayak Industries vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Purulia Charge And Ors.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Shree Vinayak Industries, filed a writ petition challenging an adjudication order dated 01.02.2022 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax and an appellate order dated 06.02.2025 passed by the appellate authority. The petitioner's appeal was dismissed solely on the grounds of limitation. The petitioner contended that a show cause notice dated 25.10.2021 was uploaded on the GST portal under the 'Additional Notice and Orders' tab, without any separate intimation, leading to the petitioner's inability to respond. The petitioner only became aware of the adjudication order upon a change of accountant. Subsequently, a notice dated 16.09.2026 was issued to recover liabilities. The petitioner argued that the proceedings and orders violated principles of natural justice and statutory procedures.

Held

The Court found that the petitioner had made out a prima facie case. It observed that the show cause notice was uploaded only under the 'Additional Notice and Orders' tab, and no separate intimation was provided, which prevented the petitioner from replying. This was considered a violation of natural justice. Since the petitioner's appeal was dismissed by the appellate authority solely on the ground of limitation and not on merits, the Court deemed interference warranted in the interest of justice, considering the peculiar facts. Consequently, the adjudication order dated 01.02.2022, the appeal order dated 06.02.2025, and the show cause notice dated 25.10.2021 were quashed and set aside. The Court directed the respondent No. 1 to issue a fresh show cause notice within two weeks, allowing the petitioner two weeks to respond. Respondent No. 1 was further directed to revisit the issue, afford an opportunity of hearing, and pass a fresh reasoned order in accordance with law within 12 weeks, with the decision to be communicated within a week thereafter.

Key Issues

1. Whether the dismissal of the petitioner's appeal by the appellate authority on the sole ground of limitation, without considering the merits, is legally sustainable, particularly when the petitioner alleges a violation of natural justice due to inadequate notice under Section 107 of the WBGST Act and CGST Act? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the show cause notice was not properly served as it was only uploaded on the GST portal under 'Additional Notice and Orders' without any direct intimation, thus violating principles of natural justice. They contended that the appellate authority erred in dismissing the appeal on limitation without addressing the merits, especially given the circumstances of non-receipt of proper notice. The petitioner also claimed that the entire proceedings were contrary to law and statutory procedure. State-respondents' arguments: The State-respondents opposed the petition, submitting that the petitioner was granted ample opportunities to defend their case, and therefore, the appeal was rightly dismissed on the ground of limitation.