The Rajasthan High Court, on Friday, 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 found that the officer acted in a reckless illegal manner leading to unwarranted litigation.
A bench of Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Kuldeep Mathur was considering a petition filed by Hindustan Contruction Company Ltd submittingthat detailed reply to the show cause notice was furnished and a request was also made for personal hearing to the Officer before adjudication of the matter. However, neither the reply of assessee was considered nor any opportunity of personal hearing was givenby the officer.
The counsel for the GST department, Shri Bhandari has tried to supplement the reasons for passing of the impugned order in the reply. However, the fact remains that the order itself is totally silent regarding consideration of the reply of the assessee.
The department, along with the reply, a copy of the dispatch register has been filed wherein, it is recorded that notice for personal hearing was dispatched to the petitioner on 30.05.2022 and that the notice was received by a person named SatyanarayanChechani on 18.06.2022 who is the petitioner’s authorized representative. Shri Bhandari admitted that no such notice for personal hearing was forwarded to the petitioner through e-mail.
However, petitioner submitted that Shri Chechani was not engaged by the petitioner to represent it in the subject proceedings before the Joint Commissioner.
Allowing the petition, the Court held that “In view of the facts noted above, we are of the opinion that the Officer acted in a reckless illegal manner leading to unwarranted litigation being filed in the Court. Furthermore, we have serious reservations on the veracity of the dispatch register. Thus, Shri Hitesh Trivedi, Joint Commissioner, Circle Nimbahera is directed to personally remain present in the Court with the original record including the dispatch register on 15.12.2022 to show cause as to why cost should not be imposed upon him for nonperformance of duties enjoined upon him by law.”
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to TaxscanAdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
