The Allahabad High Court has ruled that the expiry of the limitation period for passing a Goods and Services Tax ( GST ) assessment order does not justify denying an opportunity of hearing to the concerned party.
Justices Kshitij Shailendra and Arun Bhansali observed that even in cases where the limitation period is nearing expiry, the authorities could have scheduled a short date for a personal hearing to ensure compliance with the principles of natural justice.
Become a PF & ESIC expert with our comprehensive course – Enroll Now
A writ petition challenging the assessment order issued under Section 73 of the U.P.G.S.T./C.G.S.T. Act, 2017, for the financial year 2019-20.
The petitioner, Gannon Dunkerley contended that the show-cause notice dated May 25, 2024, required a reply by June 25, 2024, but failed to specify any date, time, or venue for a personal hearing, instead marking these fields as “NA.”
The petitioner filed a reply to the show-cause notice on August 6, 2024, explicitly requesting a personal hearing by marking “Yes” in Form GST DRC-06 and reiterating the request in their written reply. However, the assessing authority passed the assessment order on the same day, without granting the requested hearing. The petitioner argued that this violated the principles of natural justice.
The Government Counsel submitted that the petitioner had been given sufficient opportunities and that the approaching expiration of the limitation period necessitated the issuance of the order.
Become a PF & ESIC expert with our comprehensive course – Enroll Now
The High Court, after examining the records, found that the show-cause notice did not reflect any intent to grant a hearing. The Court pointed out that once the petitioner explicitly requested a hearing, it was the authority’s duty to provide one.
The Court further stated that the limitation period’s expiration could not rescind the petitioner’s right to be heard.
The bench quashed the assessment order dated August 6, 2024, and directed the authorities to issue a fresh order after granting the petitioner a proper opportunity for a personal hearing.
The petitioner was instructed to appear before the authority without requiring a fresh notice for the appearance.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
