GST assessment order upheld after petitioner failed to disclose show cause notice and concealed material facts

The Allahabad HC dismissed a writ petition challenging the validity of a GST assessment order. The petitioner claimed no notice or hearing opportunity was provided under Section 74 of the CGST/UPGST Act, 2017. The court found that a show cause notice in Form GST-DRC-01A was issued, fixing date, time and place for personal hearing. The petitioner failed to disclose or dispute this notice in the petition and concealed material facts, disentitling relief under Article 226. The court held no breach of natural justice occurred and dismissed the petition for lack of merit.

---

---

Issues:
Violation of principles of natural justice in passing the impugned assessment order without affording opportunity of hearing.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking to quash an order passed by respondent no. 3 under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act without providing an opportunity of hearing. The petitioner argued that the assessment order was passed in violation of principles of natural justice as no notice or hearing was granted. The petitioner relied on Section 75(4) of the Act and a previous court decision to support the claim. However, the standing counsel contended that the impugned order was passed in accordance with the law and after due notice and hearing. The court carefully considered the submissions and examined the record of the case.

The facts of the case revealed that a survey of the petitioner's business premises was conducted, and subsequent notices were issued to the petitioner under various sections of the Act. Despite multiple opportunities for hearings and responses, the petitioner failed to appear or provide any submissions. The respondent no. 3 eventually passed the impugned assessment order after considering the available material on record. The petitioner, aggrieved by this order for the assessment year 2017-18, approached the court through the writ petition.

The court noted that the petitioner did not deny the issuance of show cause notices or the opportunity for a personal hearing as claimed by the Assessing Officer. The court observed that the petitioner concealed material facts of the case, which could disentitle him to any relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Referring to a Supreme Court case, the court emphasized the importance of coming to court with clean hands and the consequences of approaching the court with falsehoods.

Ultimately, the court found no merit in the petitioner's argument regarding the breach of natural justice principles by respondent no. 3. The submissions of the petitioner were rejected, and the writ petition was dismissed with a cost imposed on the petitioner. The court granted liberty to the petitioner to appeal against the impugned order on merit in accordance with the law.

---