Ms Girish Chandra Bhatt Contractor vs. Commissioner Uttarakhand State Goods And Service Tax Commissionerate

Held

The Court allowed the writ petition, quashing the impugned order dated 26.12.2023. The Court directed the petitioner to visit the office of Respondent No.2 within 7 days from the date of the order. Upon the petitioner's appearance, Respondent No.2 was directed to immediately provide a copy of the show-cause notice under Section 73(1) of the Act. The petitioner was then granted 15 days from the receipt of the physical notice to submit their reply. Following this, the proper officer was directed to decide the objections filed by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law. The Court found merit in the petitioner's submission regarding the lack of proper service of the show-cause notice due to technical difficulties, thereby violating the principle of natural justice.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Girish Chandra Bhatt Contractor, filed a writ petition before the Uttarakhand High Court challenging an order dated 26.12.2023. This order imposed tax liability, penalty, and interest upon the petitioner. The petitioner contended that they were not properly served with a show-cause notice under Section 73(1) of the Uttarakhand Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. While the notice was uploaded on the department's official website, the petitioner claimed they could not access it due to technical issues. The petitioner requested an opportunity to respond to the notice if provided physically. The respondents did not oppose this prayer.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner was afforded a proper opportunity of being heard before the impugned order was passed, specifically concerning the issuance and service of the show-cause notice under Section 73(1) of the Uttarakhand Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that they have a right to be issued a show-cause notice under Section 73(1) of the Act. They further contended that although the notice was uploaded on the department's website, they were unable to access it due to technical glitches. Therefore, they sought a physical issuance of the notice to enable them to contest the claim on merits. Respondents' Arguments: The learned counsel for the respondents did not oppose the proposition offered by the petitioner.