Rashmi Rungta Vs Union of India & ors. (Calcutta High Court)
The Calcutta High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by Rashmi Rungta, who sought to set aside a service tax order, citing a lack of personal hearing. The court’s decision hinged on the petitioner’s failure to formally notify the tax authorities of her address change, which it determined was the reason she missed the hearing notices.
The petitioner, Rashmi Rungta, had challenged an order dated March 8, 2024, issued by the adjudicating authority. The order was passed following a show-cause notice regarding alleged contraventions of the Finance Act, 1994, and Service Tax Rules, 1994. Instead of appealing the order to the appellate authority, the petitioner directly approached the High Court, arguing that the principles of natural justice had been violated because no personal hearing was offered.
The petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Chattopadhyay, argued that while his client had initially responded to the show-cause notice from her Kolkata address, she had subsequently moved to Gauhati. He contended that despite providing her phone number and email ID, the respondents failed to communicate with her electronically, instead sending notices to her old address.
However, the respondents’ counsel, Mr. Dey, countered this argument by highlighting that the petitioner had been offered multiple opportunities for a personal hearing on November 20, 2023, and December 5, 2023. He pointed out that the notices for these hearings were sent to the original Kolkata address, as the petitioner had never officially informed the department of her change of residence. Critically, the court noted that the petitioner’s own affidavit, filed on September 20, 2024, still listed her address as the same Kolkata location.
