Bhole Baba Oroganic Dairy Milk Private Limited vs. Commissioner Of The SGST

Facts

The petitioner, a company paying tax under the State GST, challenged an order dated 26.12.2023 passed by the Proper Officer/Deputy Commissioner (Assessment)-I, State Tax, Roorkee, District Haridwar. The petitioner's sole ground for challenge was that no intimation in Form GST DRC-01A, as required under Section 73 of the Uttarakhand Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, was provided before the impugned order was passed. The petitioner sought quashing of the order and a direction to the respondent not to recover any amount and to provide an opportunity for a personal hearing before passing any fresh order.

Held

The Court held that the intimation in Form GST DRC-01A is a mandatory prerequisite before passing an order under Section 73 of the Uttarakhand Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. This is to ensure that the assessee is given an opportunity to respond to the proposed tax liability. The Court relied on its previous judgment in WPMS No. 141 of 2023, which established this principle. Consequently, the impugned order dated 26.12.2023 was quashed. The matter was remanded back to the Competent Authority to initiate proceedings de novo. The Competent Authority was granted liberty to issue intimation to the petitioner in Form GST DRC-01A within three weeks.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Proper Officer was mandated to provide an intimation in Form GST DRC-01A to the petitioner before passing an order under Section 73 of the Uttarakhand Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? The petitioner argued that intimation in Form GST DRC-01A is mandatory before issuing a notice under Section 73. They relied on a previous judgment of the Court in WPMS No. 141 of 2023, which held that the person chargeable with tax is entitled to such an intimation to respond. The revenue, represented by the learned State Counsel, conceded that a similar controversy was decided in WPMS No. 141 of 2023.