GST Adjudication Order Upheld: Petitioners Denied Relief, Granted Limited Appeal Window with Cost Conditions

HC dismissed writ petition challenging GST adjudication order under Section 73(9). Court found petitioners did not utilize timely appeal mechanisms and their objections lacked merit. HC granted leave to first petitioner to file appeal within two weeks, subject to Rs.10,000 cost payment, directing appellate authority to hear case on merits.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to adjudication order under Section 73(9) of the CGST/WBGST Act, 2017
Alleged lack of opportunity of hearing and violation of circular no. CBIC 183/15/2022 GST
Consideration of response to show cause
Delay in filing an appeal and seeking relief through a writ petition
Granting leave to file an appeal before the appellate authority

Analysis:
The writ petition challenged an adjudication order under Section 73(9) of the CGST/WBGST Act, 2017, alleging lack of opportunity of hearing and violation of circular no. CBIC 183/15/2022 GST. The petitioners contended that their response to the show cause was not considered, but the court noted that the proper officer had acknowledged and considered their response, stating it cannot be a subject of consideration in a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

The petitioners also raised the issue of not being afforded an opportunity of hearing, which the court deemed as an afterthought since the order was passed on 31st October, 2023, and no appeal was filed within the prescribed period. The court emphasized that the petitioners had not taken timely steps to challenge the order and had an alternative remedy through an appeal, which they failed to utilize. Therefore, the court declined to interfere, considering the delay and lack of explanation for not filing an appeal promptly.

The advocate for the petitioners requested leave to file an appeal, stating the petitioners were wrongly advised previously. The court granted leave to the first petitioner to file an appeal within two weeks from the date of the judgment, subject to payment of costs of Rs.10,000 to the respondents. The court directed the appellate authority to hear and dispose of the appeal on merits, provided the petitioners comply with other formalities.

In conclusion, the writ petition was disposed of with the above observations and directions, with no order as to costs. The court emphasized the importance of timely action and utilizing available legal remedies, granting an opportunity for the petitioners to file an appeal before the appellate authority.

---