M/S Vats Group INDIA PVT. LTD. vs. Directorate General Of GST Intelligence Regional Unit And 3 Others
Held
The Court allowed the petitioner to file their reply to the panchnama within 15 days. The department was directed to adjudicate upon the petitioner's reply after providing an opportunity of hearing within two weeks thereafter. The Court explicitly stated that it was not going into the merits of the case. The ratio decidendi is that procedural fairness, including the right to reply to official notices, should be upheld, and matters should be adjudicated after affording a proper hearing. The operative direction is to permit the petitioner to file a reply and for the department to adjudicate upon it with a hearing.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Vats Group India Pvt. Ltd., filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. The petition was primarily concerned with a panchnama issued to the petitioner. The petitioner's counsel requested permission to file a reply to this panchnama in accordance with the rules. The respondents, including the Directorate General of GST Intelligence, Regional Unit, were represented by their respective counsel. The court heard arguments from both sides.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner should be allowed to file a reply to the panchnama in accordance with the rules? Petitioner's argument: The petitioner argued that they should be permitted to submit a reply to the panchnama as per the established rules and procedures. Revenue's argument: The revenue did not present any specific arguments against the petitioner's request to file a reply to the panchnama. The court's order indicates that the revenue's counsel was heard, but no specific contention against the petitioner's prayer is recorded.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 1304 of 2023 Petitioner :- M/S Vats Group India Pvt. Ltd.
Respondent :- Directorate General Of Gst Intelligence Regional Unit And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shiv Sagar Singh,J.B. Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Siddhartha Varma,J.
Hon'ble Shekhar B. Saraf,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 Sri Ankur Agarwal and the learned counsel for the respondents no. 1, 3 and 4, Sri Gaurav Mahajan.
The counsel on behalf of the petitioner primarily prays that he be allowed to reply to the panchnama issued as per rules.
In light of above submission, without going into the merits of the case, we allow the petitioner to file his reply in accordance with rules to the said panchnama within 15 days.
The department is directed to adjudicate upon the same after granting an opportunity of hearing within a period of two weeks, thereafter.
With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 30.11.2023 PK (Shekhar B. Saraf,J.) (Siddhartha Varma,J.) PRAVEEN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
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 Allahabad High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.