Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Kabita Rath Vs Chief Commissioner, C.T. & G.S.T., Odisha & Another (Orissa High Court)
Appeal Number : W.P.(C) No.1672 of 2024
Date of Judgement/Order : 30/01/2024
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Kabita Rath Vs Chief Commissioner, C.T. & G.S.T., Odisha & Another (Orissa High Court)

Introduction: Kabita Rath, represented by counsel, contested an ex-parte order passed by Opposite Party No.2-State Tax Officer under Section 73 of the OGST Act in the Orissa High Court. The order, dated 18.11.2023, was challenged due to the absence of any opportunity for personal hearing granted to the petitioner. This article delves into the details of the case, arguments presented by both parties, and the subsequent judgment of the court.

Detailed Analysis:

The petitioner’s counsel argued vehemently against the order, emphasizing the lack of a fair hearing, citing precedent cases for support. On the other hand, the Additional Standing Counsel representing the Opposite Parties acknowledged the absence of a hearing and advocated for a remand to provide the petitioner with the requisite opportunity.

The court, without delving into the merits of the case, ruled in favor of the petitioner, quashing the order dated 18.11.2023. The judgment highlighted the fundamental principle of natural justice, necessitating a fair hearing before any adverse decision. The matter was remanded to the original authority for a fresh hearing in accordance with the law.

Conclusion: The Orissa High Court’s decision to quash the ex-parte order and remand the matter for a fair hearing underscores the significance of procedural fairness in legal proceedings. The judgment reaffirms the principle that all parties must be given an opportunity to present their case before any adverse action is taken. This case serves as a reminder of the importance of due process and upholding the principles of natural justice in administrative proceedings.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF ORISSA HIGH COURT

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. Heard Ms. Itishree Tripathy, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr. Diganta Dash, learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the CT & GST Department-Opposite Parties.

3. The Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking to quash the order dated 18.11.2023 passed by Opposite Party No.2-State Tax Officer, CT & GST, Cuttack-I City Circle, Cuttack under Section 73 of the OGST Act without granting any opportunity of personal hearing to the Petitioner and an ex-parte order has been passed.

4. Ms. Itishree Tripathy, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner vehemently contended that Opposite Party No.2-State Tax Officer, CT & GST, Cuttack-I City Circle, Cuttack has passed the order dated 18.11.2023 under Section 73 of the OGST Act without giving any opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner. Therefore, the Petitioner approached this Court by way of filing this writ petition. He is further contended that the case of the Petitioner is fully covered by the judgment of this Court in Khani Khyatigrasta Gramya Committee v. The Commissioner of Commercial Tax & GST and Another (in W.P.(C) No.27946 of 2023, disposed of on 09.11.2023).

5. Mr. Diganta Dash, learned Additional Standing Counsel appearing for the Opposite Parties-Department contended that since the Petitioner has not been given opportunity of hearing, the matter has to be remanded to the authority concerned so that opportunity of hearing can be given to the Petitioner in consonance with the provision of law.

GST on white paper with laptop

6. Considering the contentions raised by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, but, however without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, since the State Tax officer while passing the order dated 18.11.2023 has not been given opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner, the said order cannot be sustained in the eye of law. Accordingly, the order dated 18.11.2023 is liable to be quashed and is hereby quashed. Therefore, this Court remits back to the very same authority to rehear the matter afresh in accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner taking into consideration the ratio decided by this Court in Khani Khyatigrasta Gramya Committee (supra).

7. With the above observation, the writ petition stands disposed of.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Ads Free tax News and Updates
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
February 2025
M T W T F S S
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
2425262728