M/S Sterling And Wilson Private Limited vs. Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court held that the impugned order was passed without considering the reply filed by the petitioner, which was a crucial factual aspect. The Court noted that the respondent did not dispute this submission. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned order. The case was remanded to respondent No. 2 for fresh adjudication. The Court further directed that the executing authority would be at liberty to initiate fresh proceedings and that the issue of limitation would not act as an impediment to these fresh proceedings. No specific amount in dispute was recorded.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Sterling and Wilson Private Limited, challenged an order passed by respondent No. 2 levying GST and penalty under Section 74 of the CGST Act. The petitioner contended that the impugned order erroneously stated that no reply was filed, whereas a reply had been submitted and was available on the Department's portal. The respondent's counsel did not dispute this factual assertion. The impugned order was passed by respondent No. 2.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned order, passed under Section 74 of the CGST Act, is vitiated by a failure to consider the reply filed by the petitioner? (Question of law and fact) Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the impugned order was passed without considering their reply, which was duly filed and available on the Department's portal. This failure to consider the submitted reply renders the order invalid. Revenue's contention: The revenue did not dispute the petitioner's assertion that a reply was filed and not considered.