TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 1509
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and Order. However, for the sake of convenience and clarity in passing the directions, this Court finds it relevant to take note of the brief facts which led to the filing of both the writ petitions. WP(C)/129/2024 4. The Petitioner No. 1 herein is the Proprietor of a Firm in the name and style of M/S Dimapur Diesels. The said Firm, namely M/S Dimapur Diesels is registered under the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short 'CGST') and have been allocated a Registration No. being GSTIN13ABUPA6964C2ZO. The present writ petition so filed challenges the Order dated 18.07.2023, passed by the Respondent No. 3 under Section 74(9) of the Nagaland Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short 'NGST'). 5. The materials on record shows that the Petitioner No. 2 herein was issued a Notice in DRC-01-A dated 14.11.2022 wherein the determined tax interest and penalty for the periods 2019-2020, 2020-2021 and 2021-2022 were mentioned. 6. The Petitioner No. 2upon receipt of the said Notice sought for time for complying with the same. Thereupon, the Respondent No. 2 issued another Notice under DRC-01-A for the Financial Years 2019-2020, 2020-2021 and 2021-2022. It is, however, perti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....6964C1ZP. The Petitioners have challenged the Orders dated 17.07.2023 in the instant proceedings which relates to the Financial Year 2020-2021 and 2021-2022. 11. The case of the Petitioners herein are that on 04.11.2022, the Respondent No. 2 had issued a Tax Determination Order under DRC-01-A and determined a total tax, interest and penalty for the purpose of 2019-2020, 2020-2021 and 2021-2022. The Petitioner sought for extension of time for the purpose of complying with the said Notice. Subsequent thereto, the Respondent No. 2 rectified its tax determination and issued again another Notice under DRC-01-A providing on 09.03.2023 on stating the tax, penalty as well as the interest. 12. The Petitioners' case is that under coercion, on 27.06.2023 the penalty portion of Rs. 23,15,044/- (Rupees twenty three lakhs fifteen thousand and forty four) Rs. 79,70,949/- (Rupees seventy nine lakh seventy thousand nine hundred and forty nine) and Rs. 9,91,546/- (Rupees nine lakhs ninety one thousand five hundred and forty six) were paid for the period 2019-2020, 2020-2021 and 2021-2022 respectively. The payments were made on 27.06.2023. 13. A Show Cause Notice was issued under Section 74(....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ars to the proper Officer that any tax has not been paid or short paid or erroneously refunded or where input tax credit have been wrongly availed or utilized by reason of fraud or any willful misstatement or suppression of facts or to evade tax, which is completely different when there can be an exercise of powers under Section 73 of the NGST Act, wherein the element of fraud or willful misstatement or suppression of facts is not there. 19. The learned counsel for the Petitioners, drawing attention to the Show Cause Notices issued on 28.06.2023 in both the writ petitions submitted that there is not a single whisper that the return was submitted by the Petitioners by reason of fraud or any willful misstatement or suppression of facts. The learned counsel further submitted that the exercise of powers under Section 74(9) to issue an Order in DRC-07 is totally contrary to the provisions of Section 74 of the NGST Act. The learned counsel for the Petitioners further referring to the said Show Cause Notices issued in both the writ petitions submitted that in absence of allegations of fraud or any willful misstatement or suppression of facts to evade tax the exercise of power under Sec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....an alternative remedy of preferring appeals against these impugned Orders under Section 107 of the NGST Act. However, no appeals were filed and the Petitioners have approached this Court by filing the present writ petition. The learned counsels further submitted that this is not a case where the jurisdiction or authority of the Respondent Authorities to pass the impugned orders have been assailed. It is a case where inspite of there being an efficacious and effective remedy to approach the Appellate Authority under Section 107 of the NGST Act the Petitioners have come before this Court. 25. The learned counsel for the Respondents also submitted that upon issuance of the Notice in terms with Section 142(1)(A) of the Central Goods & Services Tax Rules, 2017 which is applicable in so far as the NGST Act is concerned in Form DRC-01-A, the Petitioners knew that their case fall within the ambit of suppression of facts in order to evade taxes and this aspect would be apparent from the fact that the Petitioners have submitted a Reply stating inter alia that the Petitioners were not responsible for the evasion of tax as alleged. 26. The learned counsels for the Respondents further sub....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ENT OF NAGALAND OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAXES NAGALAND, DIMAPUR. NO.DCST/GST/ENF(HQ)/2022/491 Dated Dmr 26 June 23 Legal Name: Mr Thekrobizolie Angami GSTIN: 13ABUPA6964C1ZP Trade name: Airport road, Dimapur. M/S Progressive Motors; Ward-E Address: Airport road, Dimapur. Sub: Show cause Notice under section 74 (1) & (7) Whereas, out of the total liability ascertained and intimated to you vide order No DCST/GST/ENF(HQ)/2022/160 01.9/3/2023 for the period 2019-20, 2020-21 & 2021-22, you have voluntarily paid only the penalty portion (15%) amounting to Rs. 23,15,044/- for the Period 2019-20 Rs. 79.70.994/- for the Period 2020-21, and Rs 9.91.546/-for the Period 2021-22. Therefore, you are asked to show cause as to why demand notice in DRC-07 should not be issued to you for the remaining amount of tax and interest indicated below: Year CGST SGST Interest 2020-21 1,34,39,607.00 1,34,39,607.00 84,66,948.00 2021-22 33,05,154.00 33,05,154.00 9,91,546.00 G Total 1,67,44,761.00 1,67,44,761.00 94,58,494.00 Please note that in the event ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4, adverse Orders were passed. However, there was no opportunity of hearing given to the Petitioners. 33. This Court further finds it relevant to take note of that in terms with Section 75(6) of the NGST Act, it is the mandate that the Proper Officer, in his Order shall set out the relevant facts and the basis of his decision. A perusal of the impugned Order dated 18.07.2023 in WP(C)/129/2024 and the impugned Order dated 17.07.2023 in WP(C)/130/2024 would clearly show that the impugned Orders have been passed without setting out the relevant facts as well as the basis of the decision. 34. Considering the above, it is, therefore, the opinion of this Court that neither the Show Cause Notices which were issued on 28.06.2023 to the Petitioners in both the writ petitions are in consonance with Section 74(1) of the NGST Act nor the impugned Orders of adjudication are in consonance with Section 75 of the NGST Act as no opportunity of hearing were granted as required under Section 75(4) of the NGST Act as well as the impugned Orders do not contain the relevant facts and the basis of the decisions. Considering the above, it is, therefore, the opinion of this Court that this is a fit c....