ORAL ORDER

PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA

Heard learned advocate Mr. Maulik Nanavati for Nanavati & Co. for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Raj Tanna for the respondent No.1 State as well as for respondent Nos. 2 and 3, who are the authorities of the State.

2. By filling this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner Navkar Metal Industries – a proprietary concern, prayed to set aside show cause notice dated 20.6.2022 issued by respondent No.2- Assistant Commissioner, Ghatak-23, Ahmedabad, Goods and Services Tax. It is further prayed to quash all the proceedings which may have been initiated pursuant to the said notice.

2.1 By the aforementioned notice dated 20.6.2022, it was informed to the petitioner that on the basis of the information received, the Service Tax registration of the petitioner was liable to be cancelled. The reason stated was one line reason mentioning that, “In case, Registration has been obtained by means of fraud, willful misstatement or suppression of facts”.

3. The petitioner stated that he was registered under the Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 holding the GST Identification Number 24AGUPJ3695E4ZY. The GST Registration certificate was produced. It was submitted that in the notice dated 20.6.2022, the petitioner was called upon to appear on 28.6.2022. However, in the notice neither the name nor the designation of the issuing authority was mentioned, nor any details were given as to on what grounds fraud was alleged against the petitioner. It was submitted that notice was vague and did not reveal any specific ground to proceed against the petitioner.

3.1 Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that no documentary material was relied on in substantiation of one line cryptic reason mentioned in the notice. It was submitted that breach of natural justice was evident inasmuch as in absence of any material, the petitioner was not in position to defend its case. It was submitted that opportunity to defend ought to have been given to the petitioner. It was further submitted that the reasons as well as the record in support of the ground raised in the impugned order ought to have been supplied to the petitioner alongwith the show cause notice. It was submitted that vagueness in the notice itself was breach of natural justice.

3.2 The respondent No.2 filed affidavit-in-reply to raise various contentions. Learned Assistant Government Pleader made submissions on the basis of the contents of the affidavit-in-reply to submit that the show cause notice under section 29 of the Goods and Services Tax Act. 2017, which was served through registered A.D. Post. It was submitted that opportunity of personal hearing was given to the petitioner and date was fixed to be 28.6.2022, but the petitioner did not remain present. It was the contention that the petitioner did not remain present deliberately.

4. Subsequent to filling of the petition, there is no gainsaying that the detailed show cause notice was delivered to the petitioner. Therefore, the ground raised in the petition that notice was not sent with detailed reasons to the petitioner nor was uploaded on the portal, no longer remained available to be advanced.

4.1 The factum of receipt of of show cause notice has been accepted by the petitioner in the rejoinder affidavit dated 13.3.2023, quoting paragraph No.8,

“I submit that in view of receipt of detailed show cause notice, albeit post expiration of the date fixed for grant of personal hearing to the petitioner, interest of justice would be met if the petitioner is permitted to file a reply to the notice and a direction is issued to the department to fix a fresh date of grant of personal hearing.”

5. In view of the aforesaid developments and the situation emerging, this petition is disposed of by passing the following directions,

(i) The petitioner shall be given time till 15th April, 2023 to submit its reply.

(ii) The date of personal hearing within this period may also be fixed to provide the reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner.

(iii) The decision shall be rendered by the competent authority within three weeks from the date when the aforesaid exercise of hearing is completed.

5.1 In order to enable the competent authority to undertake the aforesaid exercise and pass fresh order, the impugned notice dated 20.6.2022 is hereby quashed and set aside.

6. It is clarified that this court has passed the above limited directions without going into the merits of the case of either side.

7. The petition is allowed in the above terms and to the aforesaid extent.