HC dismisses order which was based on half-baked, incomplete & internet acquired knowledge

OPC Assets Solutions Pvt Ltd Vs State of Tripura (Tripura High Court)

The order passed by the Superintendent and the approach that he has adopted is totally unsatisfactory. To begin with, the order reads more like a thesis in several fields of law in which he has tried to exhibit his half-baked, incomplete and internet acquired knowledge, in the process completely losing sight of the focal issue. He has made his order needlessly verbose, in the process not deciding the vital issues at all. More importantly he has referred to materials, documents and judgments and there is no evidence that he ever shared the same with the petitioner before relying upon them. In the age of internet and availability of information through technology, the Superintendent of Taxes was not precluded from doing his own homework and finding out material which was useful for the purpose of the case that he was deciding. However, any use of such material must precede sharing of it with the person likely to be adversely affected by his order. The basic requirement of principle of natural justice for sharing adverse material before utilising the same against a person must be observed with greater rigour in the times of availability of information on internet, all of which need not necessarily be accurate at all times. Accurate or otherwise the noticee must have a chance to meet with such adverse material before it is used against him. For each individual reason namely the order being unintelligible, the action failing the test of principles of natural justice and the Superintendent of Taxes exceeding the show-cause notice, the impugned orders must be set aside. For sheer verbosity the orders must go. The same are accordingly set aside. Nothing stated in this order would prevent the Superintendent of Taxes from proceeding against the petitioner afresh for framing proper assessment if so advised and permitted under law.

Tripura HC: Orders insisting demand of GST for different assessment years by issuance of SCN for a single year is invalid

 OPC Assets (Petitioner) has challenged 5 summary demand orders collectively passed by the Superintendent of Taxes (Respondent No. 3) on April 23, 2021 raising demands of Central as well as GST and IGST from the petitioner with penalty for the tax periods 2017-18 to 2020-21.

The Petitioner, in this case, had contended that a Show Cause Notice (SCN) [dated March 10, 2021] was issued for only one year [assessment year 2018-19] whereas the Respondent No. 3 passed five separate orders for different tax periods, which was altogether invalid. Furthermore, the Respondent counsel contended that the order in question is sound on merits and is an appealable order.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.