Rapid House A Proprietary Concern vs. The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner Of State Tax

Held

The Court quashed and set aside the order dated 16.03.2020 passed by the Additional Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal). The matter was remanded back to the Appellate Authority for consideration of all issues, including the delay in filing the appeal, the fact that the petitioner had filed a return, the order passed without compliance with statutory provisions and principles of natural justice, and the assessment order itself. The Court condoned the fourteen-day delay in filing the appeal, finding it not deliberate and substantially explained by inundation in the area. The Court directed the Appellate Authority to decide the appeal on merits after complying with principles of natural justice, affording an opportunity of hearing, and considering the petitioner's filed return. The bank account attachment was ordered to be de-frozen immediately. The deposit of ten percent of the disputed amount, a prerequisite for appeal hearing, was noted as already made or to be made. All issues raised before the High Court were left open for the Appellate Authority to examine. The Court explicitly stated it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

Facts

The petitioner, Rapid House, challenged an order dated 12.10.2019 passed by the Joint Commissioner of State Tax (Respondent No. 3) for the month of August 2019, and a subsequent order dated 16.03.2020 by the Additional Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal) (Respondent No. 2) which dismissed the petitioner's appeal in limine. The appeal was dismissed solely on the ground of delay, exceeding fourteen days. The petitioner argued that the assessment order was passed in violation of statutory provisions and principles of natural justice, as no notice was issued. Furthermore, the petitioner claimed to have filed the return for August 2019, which the Assessing Officer should have considered before passing the impugned order. The revenue contended that the Assessing Officer has no power to condone the delay in filing the return, which was three days late.

Key Issues

1. Whether the order dated 12.10.2019 passed by the Joint Commissioner of State Tax was in violation of the statute and principles of natural justice, specifically concerning the issuance of notice and consideration of the filed return (Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017, and principles of natural justice)? 2. Whether the order dated 16.03.2020 passed by the Additional Commissioner of State Tax (Appeal) was justified in dismissing the petitioner's appeal solely on the ground of delay exceeding fourteen days, and whether the delay was sufficiently explained? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the assessment order was passed without proper notice, violating principles of natural justice. They also contended that their filed return for August 2019 was not accounted for by the Assessing Officer. Regarding the appeal delay, the petitioner argued it was due to inundation in the area. Revenue's Arguments: The revenue argued that the Assessing Officer lacked the power to condone the delay in filing the return, which was three days late.