Goutam Sahoo vs. State Of West Bengal And Anr

Facts

The petitioner, Goutam Sahoo, filed a writ petition challenging an adjudication order dated 13.01.2025 passed by Respondent No. 2. The petitioner contended that a show cause notice in Form DRC-01 dated 21.11.2024 was issued and uploaded on the GST portal under the 'Additional Notice and Orders' tab, without any separate intimation. Consequently, the petitioner was unaware of the notice and could not respond. The petitioner only learned of the adjudication order in January 2025 when their accountant checked the portal. The petitioner argued that these proceedings violated principles of natural justice and statutory procedures. The State respondents opposed the petition, arguing that the petitioner had ample opportunities and that an appeal was rightly dismissed on limitation.

Held

The Court found that the petitioner had made out a prima facie case. It was held that the show cause notice being uploaded solely under the 'Additional Notice and Orders' tab on the GST portal, without any separate intimation to the petitioner, constituted a violation of the principles of natural justice. This procedural lapse prevented the petitioner from responding to the notice. Considering these peculiar facts, the Court deemed interference warranted in the interest of justice. The adjudication order dated 13.01.2025 was quashed and set aside. The petitioner was directed to file a reply to the show cause notice within two weeks of the order's communication. Respondent No. 2 was directed to provide a personal hearing and pass a fresh, reasoned, and speaking adjudication order within 12 weeks, with the decision to be communicated to the petitioner within a week thereafter. No issue was expressly left undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether the adjudication order dated 13.01.2025 is illegal and invalid due to a violation of the principles of natural justice and due compliance with prescribed procedures under the GST Act? The petitioner argued that the show cause notice was uploaded only on the GST portal under the 'Additional Notice and Orders' tab, and no separate intimation was provided. This lack of actual intimation prevented the petitioner from responding to the notice, thereby violating the principles of natural justice. The petitioner relied on the fact that they only became aware of the adjudication order after their accountant checked the portal. The State respondents argued that the petitioner had been granted ample opportunities to defend their case, and therefore, an appeal was rightly dismissed on limitation. The judgment does not explicitly name the specific provisions of the GST Act that were the subject of argument, but the core issue revolves around procedural compliance and natural justice.