Case Law Details
Black Stone Corporation Private Limited Vs State Of Gujarat & Ors (Gujarat High Court)
The case of Black Stone Corporation Private Limited versus the State of Gujarat & Others before the Gujarat High Court revolves around the adequacy of the opportunity of hearing granted to the petitioner in a dispute under the GST Act. The court’s ruling directs the petitioner to seek remedy under Section 107 of the GST Act.
Black Stone Corporation Private Limited filed a petition challenging an order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax (enforcement), Vadodara, under the GST Act. The petitioner contended that adequate opportunity of hearing was not provided, and relied-upon documents were not supplied, contrary to Section 75(4) of the GST Act.
Upon examination of the impugned order, the court found that the petitioner was indeed given an adequate opportunity of hearing, as detailed in paragraphs 5.1 to 5.9 of the order. The court also noted that the petitioner’s claim of the Electronic Credit Ledger being blocked, hindering business operations, was submitted.
However, given the finding of adequate opportunity of hearing, the court dismissed the petition, directing the petitioner to avail the alternative efficacious remedy under Section 107 of the GST Act. This remedy allows the petitioner to challenge the impugned order before the appellate authority.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF GUJARAT HIGH COURT
1. By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs :
“a) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of Certiorari or any other writ, order or direction for quashing and setting aside order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 27/12/2023 (Reference No. ZD2412230884664 (Annexure-F) passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax (4), (enforcement), Division-6, Vadodara, Respondent No.2 and further direction, to supply relied upon documents and to consider the Petitioners submission by verifying the documents and other evidence, and to decide the issue involved in this case in accordance with law and
b) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, ordering the Respondent No.2, by himself his subordinates, servants and agents, pending disposal of the present Petition not to recover amount imposed vide impugned order dated 27/12/2023 and stay the execution and other proceeding thereof and
c) This Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction order directing the Respondent No.3 to unblock/release the input Tax Credit and
d) Pending notice, admission and final disposal of this Petition, this Hon’ble Court by way of ad interim and/or interim relief be pleased direct the respondent authorities to unblock/release the input tax credit and
e) EX-PARTY ad interim relief in terms of Prayer 18 (b) & (d) be granted and
f) For costs and
g) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to grant such other and further relief as are deemed just and proper in the facts and the circumstances of this case.”
2. It is pertinent to note that the petitioner has challenged the order in original on the ground that the respondent authority has not provided the relied upon documents and no opportunity of hearing was also provided to the petitioner as contemplated under Section 75(4) of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (for short ‘the GST Act’).
3. It was also submitted by learned advocate for the petitioner that the respondent No.3 has blocked the credit in Electronic Credit Ledger from being utilized by the petitioner and, therefore, the petitioner is unable to carry on the business.
4. On perusal of the impugned order in original passed in Form GST DRC-07, it emerges that the petitioner has been given adequate opportunity of hearing as stated in Para.5.1 to 5.9 of the impugned order and, therefore, the contention of the petitioner that the opportunity of hearing not given is not tenable and the petitioner is, therefore, required to be relegated to avail the alternative efficacious remedy under Section 107 of the GST Act, to challenge the impugned order before the appellate authority.
5. In view of the above, the petition is not entertained and is accordingly dismissed.
Author Bio
