Case Law Details
Pithamber Distributors Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST) (Madras High Court)
Order passed on the same date of Show cause notice is lacing for natural justice and liable for set aside-Madras HC
Introduction: The Madras High Court’s recent ruling in the case of Pithamber Distributors vs Assistant Commissioner highlights the importance of procedural fairness in administrative proceedings. The court’s decision to set aside an order issued on the same date as the show cause notice underscores the principles of natural justice.
Court Finding and Conclusion: In the case at hand, the petitioner was served with a show cause notice and, without being granted the opportunity to be heard, an order was passed on the same date. The court, upon examining the facts and submissions, concluded that this lack of procedural fairness rendered the impugned order unsustainable.
The contention raised by the petitioner’s counsel, regarding the breach of sub-section (2) of Section 73 of the applicable GST enactments, was upheld. As a result, the court set aside the impugned order, emphasizing the need for a reasonable opportunity to be provided to the petitioner.
Conclusion: The Madras High Court’s decision in the Pithamber Distributors case reaffirms the fundamental principles of natural justice and procedural fairness. By invalidating the order issued without due consideration of the petitioner’s right to be heard, the court upholds the integrity of administrative proceedings. This ruling serves as a reminder of the judiciary’s role in safeguarding individuals’ rights and ensuring the proper application of law.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
An order dated 31.12.2023 is challenged in this writ petition. Proceedings were initiated against the petitioner by issuing show cause notice dated 31.12.2023. The impugned order was also issued on the same date.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the facts speaks for themselves and that both the show cause notice and the impugned order were issued on the same date. He further submits that the show cause notice was issued in breach of sub-section (2) of Section 73 of the applicable GST enactments.
3. Mr.T.N.C.Kaushik, learned Additional Government Pleader, accepts notice for the respondent.
4. On examining the documents placed on record, the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that a reasonable opportunity was not provided is liable to be accepted. Since both the show cause notice and impugned order were issued on the same date, the impugned order is unsustainable.
5. Consequently, impugned order dated 31.12.2023 is set aside by leaving it open to the respondent to initiate proceedings in accordance with law.
6. W.P.No.11337 of 2024 is disposed of on the above terms. No costs. Consequently, W.M.P.Nos.12431 and 12432 of 2024 are closed.
Author Bio
