2022 (3) TMI 1154 - HC - GST

Tax Authority's Non-Speaking Assessment Orders Quashed, Matter Remanded for Fresh Reasoned Decision Within Three Months

The HC quashed non-speaking assessment orders in Form GST-DRC-07 issued by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, finding they lacked essential ... Non-speaking order - quash and set aside - remand for fresh hearing - reasoned order - judicial review under Article 226 - show cause notices - vacation of interim reliefNon-speaking order - quash and set aside - remand for fresh hearing - reasoned order - Impugned assessment orders in Form GST-DRC-07 were non-speaking and therefore liable to be quashed and remitted for fresh adjudication. - HELD THAT: - The Court found that the assessment orders dated 18.12.2021 and 27.12.2021 did not reflect the consideration of relevant aspects sufficiently on their face and were therefore non-speaking. In light of that defect the orders were quashed and set aside and the matter was remitted to the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Division-3, Gandhinagar, for a de novo hearing. The Assistant Commissioner was directed to hear the writ applicants afresh and to pass a reasoned order dealing with each and every submission raised on behalf of the writ applicants, ensuring that the conclusions and the materials relied upon are recorded in the order. The Court emphasized that the Assistant Commissioner may consider all documentary and oral submissions afresh and ensure the speaking nature of the adjudication so as to meet the standards of judicial review under Article 226. [Paras 6, 7, 8]Impugned orders quashed and set aside; matter remitted for fresh hearing and a reasoned order to be passed addressing all submissions.Show cause notices - remand for fresh hearing - judicial review under Article 226 - On remand, the writ applicants are permitted to make oral and written submissions and to question the legality and validity of the show cause notices. - HELD THAT: - The Court permitted the writ applicants on the fresh hearing to file written submissions, make oral submissions, and to challenge the legality and validity of the show cause notices themselves. The direction makes clear that the scope of the remand includes full opportunity to contest both the process (validity of the notices) and the merits, and requires the authority to consider such challenges in the reasoned order to be passed. [Paras 8, 9]Writ applicants permitted to re-argue, file written submissions and challenge the show cause notices on remand; authority to consider those points in a reasoned order.Vacation of interim relief - The interim ad-interim relief granted earlier was vacated and the Court fixed a timeline for completion of the remand exercise. - HELD THAT: - The Court vacated the interim protection previously granted and directed that the fresh adjudication be completed within three months from the date of the order. The direction requires expeditious completion of the exercise by the Assistant Commissioner while ensuring that a reasoned order is rendered after hearing the parties. [Paras 9, 10]Interim relief vacated; fresh hearing to be completed within three months.Final Conclusion: Writ petition disposed of by quashing the impugned assessment orders as non-speaking, remitting the matter for a de novo hearing with a direction to pass a reasoned order addressing all submissions (including challenges to the show cause notices); interim relief vacated and the remand to be completed within three months. Issues:Challenging assessment orders as non-speaking orders, request for quashing and setting aside orders, seeking fresh hearing with a reasoned order, time limit for completion of the process.Analysis:The writ applicants sought relief through a writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the Orders in Form GST-DRC-07 dated 18.12.2021 and 27.12.2021 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax. The High Court noted that the impugned assessment orders were non-speaking orders, lacking essential reasoning. Initially inclined to quash and remit the matter for a fresh hearing, the Court issued a short notice to the respondents for final disposal. Upon further hearing, the Assistant Government Pleader acknowledged that the impugned orders were indeed non-speaking. Consequently, the Court quashed and set aside the orders, remitting the matter back to the Assistant Commissioner for a fresh hearing.The Court directed the Assistant Commissioner to conduct a new hearing, ensuring a reasoned order addressing all submissions raised by the writ applicants. Emphasizing the need for a comprehensive and detailed decision, the Court instructed that the entire process be completed within three months from the date of the judgment. The writ applicants were granted the opportunity to present oral and written submissions during the fresh hearing, including questioning the legality and validity of the show cause notices themselves. The Court concluded the judgment by disposing of the writ application and vacating the interim relief, permitting direct service of the order.