Modern Engineers And Contractors vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)

Held

The Court held that the impugned assessment order dated 29.11.2023 was liable to be set aside. The Court found that the respondent failed to place any material on record to substantiate that the personal hearing notice dated 17.11.2023 was actually issued to the petitioner or that the petitioner's authorized representative appeared for the hearing on 21.11.2023. In the absence of such evidence, the Court concluded that no proper notice was issued and no hearing was conducted before passing the order, which constituted a violation of the principles of natural justice. Consequently, the impugned assessment order and all further proceedings initiated pursuant to it were set aside. The 1st respondent was directed to issue a fresh notice to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the law. The writ petition was allowed.

Facts

The petitioner, Modern Engineers And Contractors, a registered GST dealer, filed a writ petition challenging an assessment order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 29.11.2023. The order was passed by the 1st respondent, the Deputy Assistant Commissioner ST. The assessment pertained to the period 2017-18. The petitioner contended that the assessment order was passed without affording a proper opportunity of being heard. Specifically, the petitioner denied receiving a personal hearing notice dated 17.11.2023, which was referenced in the impugned order, and denied attending any hearing on 21.11.2023. The respondent's instructions, which merely reiterated the impugned order's observations, were found unhelpful.

Key Issues

1. Whether the assessment order dated 29.11.2023, passed by the 1st respondent, is liable to be set aside for being issued without affording a proper opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, thereby violating the principles of natural justice? (Question of law) Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that they neither received the personal hearing notice dated 17.11.2023 nor attended the hearing on 21.11.2023 as stated in the impugned order. Therefore, the order passed without such notice and hearing is illegal and liable to be set aside. Respondent's contention: The learned Assistant Government Pleader placed instructions from the 1st respondent, which were found to be a mere repetition of the impugned order and thus not relied upon by the Court. No other arguments were recorded for the respondent.