Sumit Kariwala vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of State Tax And Others

Facts

The petitioner, Sumit Kariwala, challenged two orders passed by the State GST appellate authority, dated September 17, 2021, and September 22, 2021. The petitioner contended that these orders were passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically by not providing an opportunity of hearing and by issuing notices to an incorrect registered email address. The State GST authorities, represented by Mr. Mukherjee, fairly admitted the mistake of violating the principles of natural justice. The court noted that affidavits would be a futile exercise as the records could not be improved.

Held

The Court held that the impugned orders dated September 17, 2021, and September 22, 2021, were passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. The reasoning was based on the admitted fact that the petitioner was not afforded an effective and proper opportunity of hearing, and notices were not sent to the correct registered email address. The Court explicitly stated that the orders were set aside solely on this procedural ground and not on the merit of the appeals. The Court did not go into the merits of the appeals. The operative direction was to set aside the impugned orders and remand the matters back to the appellate authority. The appellate authority is directed to consider the appeals afresh and pass orders in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or their authorized representatives within eight weeks from the date of communication of the order.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned orders passed by the State GST appellate authority are liable to be set aside on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically by not affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner at their correct registered email address? (Question of law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice and procedural fairness). Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the impugned orders were passed in violation of the principles of natural justice because no effective opportunity of hearing was provided, and notices were not sent to the correct registered email address. This failure to provide a proper hearing rendered the orders invalid. Revenue/State's contention: The learned advocate for the State respondents fairly admitted the mistake of the respondent authorities in violating the principles of natural justice.