2023 (6) TMI 531 - HC - GST

Tax Authority Must Provide Fair Hearing Even If Initial Response Declines, Ensuring Procedural Fairness in GST Assessment Under Section 75(4)

M/s Mohini Traders Versus State of U.P. and Another

HC ruled that despite the petitioner initially marking 'No' to a personal hearing, the tax authority must still provide a genuine opportunity for oral ... Principles of Natural Justice - petitioner was completely denied opportunity of oral hearing before the Assessing Authority - Section 75(4) of the U.P. GST Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- Once it has been laid down by way of a principle of law that a person/assessee is not required to request for 'opportunity of personal hearing' and it remained mandatory upon the Assessing Authority to afford such opportunity before passing an adverse order, the fact that the petitioner may have signified 'No' in the column meant to mark the assessee's choice to avail personal hearing, would bear no legal consequence. Even otherwise in the context of an assessment order creating heavy civil liability, observing such minimal opportunity of hearing is a must. Principle of natural justice would commend to this Court to bind the authorities to always ensure to provide such opportunity of hearing. It has to be ensured that such opportunity is granted in real terms - the impugned order itself has been passed on 25.11.2022, while reply to the show-cause-notice had been entertained on 14.11.2022. The stand of the assessee may remain unclear unless minimal opportunity of hearing is first granted. Only thereafter, the explanation furnished may be rejected and demand created. The matter is remitted to the respondent no.2/Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Sector-6, Aligarh to issue a fresh notice to the petitioner within a period of two weeks from today - Petition allowed. Issues Involved: Challenge to the order dated 21.10.2022 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Sector-6, Aligarh for the tax period April 2018, raising demand in excess of Rs. 5 crores against the petitioner. Summary: The petitioner raised a challenge in the present petition regarding the denial of an opportunity for oral hearing before the Assessing Authority, as the only notice issued did not provide for a personal hearing. The petitioner argued that as per Section 75(4) of the U.P. GST Act, 2017, the Assessing Authority was obligated to grant a personal hearing before passing an adverse assessment order, citing relevant case laws. On the contrary, the revenue contended that the petitioner had declined the opportunity for a personal hearing by marking 'No' in the reply to the show-cause notice submitted online. After hearing both parties and examining the law, the Court found that the petitioner's choice to decline a personal hearing did not absolve the Authority from providing such an opportunity as mandated by law. The Court emphasized that in cases involving significant civil liability, ensuring a fair opportunity of hearing is essential to uphold the principles of natural justice and enable the Authority to make informed decisions. Therefore, the Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the impugned order, and directed the matter to be remitted to the Assistant Commissioner for issuing a fresh notice to the petitioner with a requirement to provide a genuine opportunity for a hearing. The judgment highlighted the importance of affording a fair opportunity of hearing to a person chargeable with tax or penalty before an adverse decision is made, as mandated by Section 75(4) of the U.P. GST Act, 2017. The Court endorsed the principle established in a previous case, emphasizing that the Authority must grant a personal hearing even if the assessee had initially declined the opportunity, especially in cases involving substantial financial implications. The Court stressed that ensuring a genuine opportunity for a hearing is crucial not only for upholding natural justice but also for facilitating reasoned decision-making that serves the interests of justice and allows for better outcomes in subsequent stages of the legal process, such as appeals. The judgment underscored the significance of providing adequate opportunities for hearing to maintain fairness and justice in tax assessment proceedings.