The Rajasthan High Court has recently withdrawn the Show Cause Notice (SCN) issued against the Joint Commissioner after issuing a demand for the penalty and interest to the assessee-Hindustan Construction Company Ltd.
The Rajasthan High Court, earlier, had asked the Joint Commissioner, Circle Nimbahera of GST to show-cause why cost should not be imposed upon him for nonperformance of duties enjoined upon him by law after Court observed that the officer acted in a “reckless illegal manner” leading to unwarranted litigation.
The respondent, Joint Commissioner of State Goods and Services Tax had issued demand notice to the assessee-petitioner ex-parte as no one appeared on behalf of the petitioner to address on the show cause notice.
Raichandani, representing the petitioner, submitted that a detailed reply to the show cause notice was furnished on behalf of the petitioner and a request was also made for personal hearing before adjudication but the impugned orders were passed without providing opportunity of hearing and without consideration of the petitioner’s assertions made in the reply.
The court had issued a Show Cause Notice to the Joint Commissioner, Hitesh Trivedi represented by Dr. Charu Mathur through VC. The officer submitted that the dispatch section of the office remains open on Saturdays and that the notice for personal hearing was as a matter of fact duly dispatched and delivered to the petitioner’s representative.
He also submitted that there was no malafide intention on his part and the impugned orders were passed ex parte as no-one appeared on behalf of the petitioner to address the show cause notice.
The respondent counsel explained to the Court that the issue before the court was only interest and penalty which is a matter of calculation only.
Further showed to court that on 17.02.2022 SCN was issued to deposit interest and penalty amount. The petitioner failed to deposit the same as per the submissions of the respondent.
Several chances were additionally given for appearance but the petitioner failed to appear or be represented, according to the respondent.
Shri Raichandai, appearing through VC, conceded that the allegations of mala fides attributed to the officer in the oral submissions may be considered withdrawn. But he contended that the impugned orders be set aside as non-speaking.
AAG Shri Shah submitted that as the petitioner’s representative failed to appear before the officer on 22.06.2022 in terms of the opportunity for hearing provided.
The detailed reply filed by the petitioner was observed to not have been considered for the demand order and the Division Bench of Justice Kuldeep Mathur and Justice Sandeep Mehta set aside the impugned demand order, while withdrawing the show cause notice issued to the Joint Commissioner.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
