Ex-parte Order Passed without Affording Sufficient Opportunity of Hearing is not Sustainable: HC

Case Details: Himanshu Traders v. Union of India - [2023] 149 taxmann.com 267 (Patna)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• • Sanjay Karol, CJ. & Partha Sarthy, J.
  • Anurag Saurav for the Petitioner.
  • K.N. Singh, Anshuman Singh & Vivek Prasad for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The input tax credit claimed by the petitioner in GSTR-3B return was rejected in ex-parte assessment order passed by the Adjudicating Authority. The tax and penalty was also imposed against the petitioner. It filed appeal against the order and contended that sufficient time was not afforded to the petitioner to represent his case but the same was rejected. Therefore, it field writ petition before the High Court.

High Court Held

The Honorable High Court noted that the order passed was ex parte in nature which didn’t assign any sufficient reasons as to how the officer could determine the amount due and payable by the petitioner. Also, there was violation of principles of natural justice as sufficient time was not afforded to the petitioner to represent his case.

Moreover, all issues of fact and law ought to have been dealt with, even if the proceedings were ex parte in nature but the authorities failed to adjudicate the matter on the attending facts and circumstances. Therefore, it was held that the impugned order was to be set aside and Adjudicating Authority was directed to decide case on merits after following principles of natural justice.