2024 (12) TMI 1005 - HC - GST

Judicial Intervention Nullifies Order Due to Procedural Defect in Notice Service, Emphasizing Importance of Accurate Communication

Champions Steel Industries Private Limited Versus Union of India, Directorate General of GST Intelligence Mumbai, Deputy Commissioner of CGST & Central Excise GST Mumbai, Deputy/ Assistant Commissioner of CGST & Cetnral Excise Division- I, Mumbai.

HC Bombay quashed an Order-in-Original (O-I-O) due to improper service of notice at an incorrect address. The court found significant discrepancies in the ... Challenge to SCN primarily on the ground of principles of natural justice - SCN and O-I-O have been served on an address which does not belong to the petitioner - HELD THAT:- The respondents have not explained as to how they came across the Pydhonie address to which personal hearing notice was served. Merely because the Pydhonie notice and O-I-O did not return back does not mean that it has been served on the petitioner at its correct address. In the interest of justice and the respondents having failed to show the proof of service of notice at the correct address of the petitioner, the impugned O-I-O dated 27 February 2021 is quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded back to the file of respondent no. 4 for adjudication of the show cause notice - Petition disposed off. Issues: Challenge of show cause notice and Order-in-Original (O-I-O) based on principles of natural justice due to incorrect address for service.In this judgment by the High Court of Bombay, the petitioner challenged a show cause notice and subsequent Order-in-Original (O-I-O) dated 27 February 2021 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India primarily on the ground of principles of natural justice. The petitioner contended that the notices were served at an incorrect address, which was not the petitioner's address, rendering the O-I-O invalid. The respondents argued that the notices were served at the address mentioned in the show cause notice and O-I-O, which were not returned, implying proper service. The court examined the documents presented during the hearing and noted discrepancies in the addresses used for correspondence. The petitioner's correct address, as recorded by the Directorate General of GST Intelligence, was 'A/3, Ahmedabad Street, Carnac Bunder, Mumbai - 400 009,' which was also confirmed by the petitioner. However, the personal hearing notice and O-I-O were addressed to a different location with incorrect details, raising doubts about proper service.The court observed that the address used for sending the personal hearing notice and O-I-O contained a wrong pin code and road details, deviating from the petitioner's known address. Despite the notices not being returned, the court found it questionable how they could be considered as served on the petitioner at the correct address. The respondents failed to provide evidence linking the incorrect address to the petitioner, leading to doubts about the validity of the service. Consequently, the court, in the interest of justice and due to the lack of proof of service at the correct address, quashed the impugned O-I-O dated 27 February 2021 and remanded the matter back to the respondent for reevaluation of the show cause notice. The respondents were directed to serve all future notices and correspondence to the petitioner at the correct address of 'M/s. Champion Steel Industries (P) Ltd., A/3, Ahmedabad Street, Carnac Bunder, Mumbai - 400 009,' along with the registered email address. The court made the rule absolute in the mentioned terms and disposed of the petition without any order as to costs.