2023(11)LCX0375

Chattisgarh High Court

TATA STEEL LTD

Versus

STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPT No. 167 of 2023 decided on 07-11-2023

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

WPT No.167 of 2023

M/s. Tata Steel Ltd. Having Its Registered Office At Bombay
House, Homi Modi Street Mumbai - 400001, Through - Its Chief
Legal Counsel (Indirect Taxation, Legal ( I And L)), Mr. Vikash
Mittal, Aged About 52 Years, S/o Mr. Hari Kishan Mittal, R/o 9,
Jubilee Officers Flat, Northern Town, P.O. And P.S. - Bistupur,
Town - Jamshedpur, District - Singhbhum (East), Jharkhand.        ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Secretary, Commercial Taxes
Department, Govt. Of Chhattisgarh, Civil Lines, Raipur, P.O. And
P.S. - Civil Lines, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492001.

2. Deputy Commissioner Of State Tax, Division - 02, Raipur,
Chhattisgarh, Civil Lines, Raipur, P.O. And P.S. - Civil Lines,
District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, 492001.

3. Additional Commissioner (Appeal), State Tax, Chhattisgarh, Gst
Bhawan, North Block, Sector - 19, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur,
District Raipur, Chhattisgarh - 492101.                                      ---- Respondents

For Petitioner : Mr. M.S. Mittal, Senior Advocate appearing
                        through video conferencing assisted by
                        Ms. Rajni Soren, Advocate
For State : Ms. Akanksha Jain, Dy. G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

Order on Board

07 .11.2023

Heard.

1) Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that a notice under Section 73 of the Chhattisgarh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short ‘ the Act of 2017’) was issued by the Revenue and the petitioner was directed to appear before the Deputy Commissioner State Tax, Division-2, Raipur (C.G.) but in details column, date of personal hearing, time of personal hearing and venue were not mentioned. It is further argued by learned Senior counsel that according to the provisions of Section 75(4) of the Act of 2017, an opportunity ought to be granted by the authorities before determining the tax value. It is also argued that no such opportunity has been granted, therefore, the impugned notice issued by the authority is illegal and liable to be set aside.

2) On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the submissions made by learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner. Ms. Jain would submit that several opportunities were granted to the petitioner to appear before the authority but those opportunities were not availed by the petitioner and therefore, there is no need to afford any opportunity to the petitioner. She would further submit that the authority issued a notice and granted liberty to the petitioner to file the reply. She would also submit that no application was moved by the petitioner to the effect that he requires a personal hearing, therefore, the provisions of Section 75(4) of the Act of 2017 would not attract.

3) Heard learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and carefully perused the material placed on record.

4) From a perusal of the notice dated 11.08.2021, it is quite clear that though in the opening para of the notice the petitioner was granted the opportunity to appear before the authority for a personal hearing, no details in this regard were mentioned in the notice and the date of personal hearing, time of personal hearing and venue were left blank.

5) Section 75(4) of the Act of 2017 reads as under:-

“S. 75(4) – An opportunity of hearing shall be granted where a request is received in writing from the person chargeable with tax or penalty, or where any adverse decision is contemplated against such person.”

6) Given the contention put forth on either side, the provisions of Section 75(4) of the Act of 2017 and the contents of the notice dated 11.08.2021, this petition is disposed of thereby directing the authorities to afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner strictly in accordance with the provisions of Section 75(4) of the Act of 2017. The Revenue may fix a date for the personal appearance of the petitioner and on that day, the petitioner shall appear before the authority. If the petitioner fails to appear before the authority on the date fixed by the Revenue, the Revenue may proceed further

7) With the aforesaid observation(s) and direction(s), the present petition is disposed of.

Sd/-
(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)
Judge