GST assessment on deceased assessee and ex parte orders: proceedings upheld in part, but remand ordered for fresh merits-based adjudication.

Proceedings initiated in a deceased assessee's name under GST were not treated as invalid merely because the death had not been intimated to the Department, and the limitation objection was not accepted as a complete bar; the framework was noted as permitting recourse to Section 73 where Section 74 was not established, with legal heir liability recognised under Section 93(1)(b). Ex parte assessment orders were then set aside to allow a merits-based reply and fresh adjudication, subject to a pre-deposit and filing of objections, with the impugned orders treated as addenda to the show-cause notices.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether proceedings initiated under Section 74 of the GST enactments were unsustainable on the grounds of the assessee's death, alleged absence of foundational ingredients, and limitation. (ii) Whether the ex parte assessment orders should be set aside and the matters remitted for fresh consideration with conditions.

Issue (i): Whether proceedings initiated under Section 74 of the GST enactments were unsustainable on the grounds of the assessee's death, alleged absence of foundational ingredients, and limitation.

Analysis: The assessee had died before the impugned proceedings, but the death had not been intimated to the Department. In that background, the notices and assessment proceedings initiated in the name of the deceased were not held invalid merely for that reason. The Court also treated the statutory framework as permitting recourse to Section 73 where Section 74 was not established, and noted the liability of legal heirs under Section 93(1)(b). The limitation objection was not accepted as a complete answer to the impugned proceedings in the circumstances noticed.

Conclusion: The challenge to the proceedings on these grounds was not accepted.

Issue (ii): Whether the ex parte assessment orders should be set aside and the matters remitted for fresh consideration with conditions.

Analysis: The impugned assessment orders were passed ex parte, and the Court found it appropriate to afford an opportunity to contest the notices on merits. At the same time, the Court balanced the equities by requiring a pre-deposit and a reply to the show-cause notices, with the impugned orders to be treated as addenda to those notices. The respondent was directed to pass fresh orders after notice and consideration of the reply and documents.

Conclusion: The ex parte assessment orders were set aside and the matters were remitted for fresh orders on merits, subject to the stipulated pre-deposit and filing of reply.

Final Conclusion: The writ petitions succeeded only to the extent of securing a remand for fresh adjudication on merits, with interim protection and conditional compliance requirements imposed on the petitioner.

Ratio Decidendi: Where ex parte GST assessment orders are challenged, the Court may set them aside and remit the matter for de novo consideration while preserving the Department's authority to proceed in accordance with law, including by requiring pre-deposit and a reply to the show-cause notice.

---