M/S. Merco Engineers Private Limited vs. Additional Commissioner
Facts
M/s. Merco Engineers Private Limited (Petitioner) filed a writ petition challenging an order-in-original dated 08.03.2022 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Ranga Reddy GST Commissionerate (Respondent No. 1). This order confirmed a demand of service tax amounting to Rs. 1,22,73,120.00 under Section 73(e) of the Finance Act, 1994, read with Section 174 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, along with interest and penalty. The Petitioner contended that neither the show cause notice preceding the order-in-original nor the notices for personal hearing were served upon them. Respondent No. 1 initially stated they would obtain instructions. Subsequently, Respondent No. 1's counsel submitted that while notices were purportedly served, there was no record of such service.
Held
The Court held that the impugned order-in-original dated 08.03.2022 passed by Respondent No. 1 was to be set aside and quashed. The Court reasoned that since there was no record of service of the show cause notice and personal hearing notices upon the Petitioner, it would meet the ends of justice to grant the Petitioner an opportunity of hearing before a fresh order is passed. The Court directed that the impugned order-in-original be treated as a show cause notice by the Petitioner, who was to file a reply within fifteen days. Thereafter, Respondent No. 1 was to pass a fresh order in accordance with the law after providing due opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner. The Court expressly left no issues undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned order-in-original dated 08.03.2022 passed by Respondent No. 1 is illegal, arbitrary, and in violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically concerning the alleged non-service of the show cause notice and personal hearing notices upon the Petitioner? (Question of law and fact, turning on principles of natural justice and procedural fairness under GST/Finance Act, 1994). Petitioner's contention: The Petitioner argued that the order-in-original was passed in violation of natural justice as they were not served with the show cause notice or notices for personal hearing, thus denying them an opportunity to present their case. Respondent's contention: Respondent No. 1's counsel submitted that while their office claimed to have served the notices, there was no record to substantiate this service upon the Petitioner.
Sections Cited
Section 73(e), Section 174
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
AND 1 t 32s5I HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Juri iction) THUR AY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO THE HONOTJRABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND THE HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE C.V. BHASKAR REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 44093 OF 2022 Between: M/s. Merco Engineers Private Limited, Rep. by its Director, Mr. Ramana Reddy Mettukuru, Flat No.502, Sri Mani Sai's Kalyan Arcade Apartment, MiyapurX Road, Hyderabad-S00 049. ...PETITIONER Additional Commissioner, Ranga Reddy GST Commissionerate, Posnett Bhavan, Tilak Road, Hyderabad.
Union of lndia, Rep. bylhe Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Central Secretariat, New Delhi-1 10001. ...RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction setting aside the order of the 1St Respondent, daled 81312O22 as illegal, arbitrary and in violation of principles of natural justice. lA NQ: 1 gF 2022 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in.the affidavit filed in support
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Telangana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.