Case Law Details
Hemanta Kumar Sharma Vs Commissioner (Audit) GST and Central Excise (Orissa High Court)
The case involves Hemanta Kumar Sharma challenging an order dated December 13, 2023, issued in response to a demand-cum-show-cause notice for penalty recovery. Sharma’s counsel argued that he was hospitalized for extended periods in 2023 and 2024, preventing him from adequately responding to the notice. Although his accountant attended the hearing, he failed to present the case effectively. Given these circumstances, Sharma sought judicial intervention to reconsider the penalty order.
The Orissa High Court acknowledged Sharma’s health-related difficulties and decided to grant him one last opportunity to present his case before the authority. The court set aside the penalty order, instructing Sharma to submit a certified copy of the judgment to the authority by December 30, 2024. Failure to do so would automatically reinstate the order. Upon submission, the authority must schedule a fresh hearing and adjudicate the matter accordingly. The ruling emphasizes procedural fairness, ensuring individuals facing genuine constraints receive a fair chance to defend their case.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF ORISSA HIGH COURT
1. Mr. Mishra, learned advocate, appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, under challenge is order in original dated 13th December, 2023 pursuant to demand-cum-show-cause notice dated 17th August, 2023 issued for recovery of penalty. He submits, his client was hospitalized between 22nd April, 2023 to 6th June, 2023 and again between 15th October, 2023 to 17th March, 2024. The time in between he was seriously unwell. In that time the demand-cum-show-cause notice was issued. His accountant, though appeared for personal hearing, could not properly represent his case before the authority. He seeks interference.
2. Satapathy, learned advocate, Senior Standing Counsel appears on behalf of revenue and submits, petitioner not only was represented at personal hearing, he has also lost his right of appeal by efflux of time. He opposes the writ petition.
3. Sequence of events regarding petitioner’s hospitalization, issuance of demand-cum-show-cause notice resulting in the order passed, move us to interfere. This is only because we want petitioner to have one last opportunity of representing his case before the authority. If he again suffers ill health requiring hospitalization or otherwise, which will be unfortunate but, same cannot be agitated any more.
4. Impugned order is set aside. Petitioner will forthwith communicate certified copy of this order to the authority, on or before 30th December, 2024. Omission to do so will automatically restore impugned order. In event of communication, the authority will fix date of hearing as one further opportunity to petitioner and proceed to adjudicate and pass order afresh.
5. The writ petition is disposed of.
Author Bio
