M/S Shree Bankey Bihari Ispat PVT. Limited vs. Union Of INDIA
Held
The Court held that it was not inclined to entertain the writ petition against a show cause notice at this stage. However, in view of the submissions made by the petitioners regarding their pending requests for cross-examination of witnesses and inspection of digital data/documents, the Court disposed of the writ petition. The Court directed the Joint Commissioner, CGST, Dehradun, to decide on the petitioners' application dated 06.08.2021, in accordance with the law, preferably within six weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of the order. Crucially, the Court ordered that no final order shall be passed until a decision is made on the petitioners' application. The ratio decidendi is that while writ petitions against show cause notices are generally not entertained, the Court may intervene to ensure procedural fairness and timely consideration of a party's legitimate requests, particularly when such consideration is a prerequisite for filing a proper response.
Facts
The petitioners challenged a show cause notice dated 31.12.2020, issued under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017, by the Joint Commissioner, CGST, Dehradun. The petitioners had submitted an interim reply but contended that a final reply could not be filed due to the pending decision on their request for permission to cross-examine witnesses whose statements were relied upon in the show cause notice. Furthermore, their request for inspection of digital data and other documents had not been considered by the Competent Authority. The petitioners filed this writ petition against the show cause notice.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Court should entertain a writ petition against a show cause notice at this stage, considering the availability of alternative remedies. Petitioner's contention: The petitioners argued that they could not submit a final reply to the show cause notice because their request for cross-examination of witnesses, whose statements were relied upon, was pending. They also contended that their request for inspection of digital data and documents was not being considered. Revenue's contention: The revenue, represented by learned counsel for the Union of India and CGST, did not explicitly record any arguments against entertaining the petition or on the merits of the petitioners' requests. The Court's order implies that the revenue did not object to the directions issued.
Sections Cited
Section 74
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS
WPMS No. 330 of 2022 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
Mr. Ramakant Gaur, Ms. Sneha Arya, Ms. Prerana Agarwal, Ms. Shubhangi Pandey and Ms. Harshi Gaur, Advocates for the petitioners.
Mr. V.K. Kaparuwan, learned Central Government Standing Counsel for the Union of India.
Mr. Shobhit Sahria, learned counsel for CGST/respondent nos. 2 & 3. Petitioners have challenged a show cause notice dated 31.12.2020 issued under Section 74 of CGST Act, 2017 by Joint Commissioner, CGST, Dehradun.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have submitted interim reply to the impugned notice, however, he submits that final reply could not be submitted for want of decision on petitioners’ request for permission to cross-examine the witnesses, whose statements have been relied upon in the show cause notice. He further submits that petitioners’ request for inspection of digital data/other documents is also not being considered by the Competent Authority.
Since petitioners have filed this
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 Uttarakhand High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.