2025(07)LCX0090

Gujarat High Court

Maruti Enterprise

Versus

State Of Gujarat

R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6993 of 2025 decided on 03-07-2025

2025

2025:GUJHC:36374-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6993 of 2025

MARUTI ENTERPRISE THROUGH ITS PROP. MARSONIYA
DHAVALKUMAR VIJAYBHAI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

Appearance:
MR FENIL H MEHTA(11663) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MS NIMISHA PAREKH, AGP WITH MR UTKARSH SHARMA, AGP for the
Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA
                    and
                HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI

Date : 03/07/2025

ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA)

1. Heard learned advocate Mr.Fenil H. Mehta for the petitioner through video conference and learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms.Nimisha Parekh with learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.Utkarsh Sharma for the respondents.

2. By this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs :

“(a) quash and set aside the order passed by Respondent No.2 u/s 74 dated 19.01.2024;

(b) quash and set aside the order passed by Respondent No.3 rejecting appeal dated 18.11.2024;

(c) quash and set aside the summary of SCN in Form GST DRC-01 dated 06.01.2024.”

3. The brief facts of the case are as under :

3.1. The petitioner purchased 370 bags of Arecanuts from M/s.K.S.Traders which is having the place of business at West Bengal on 11th March, 2021.

3.2. The respondent No.2-State Tax Officer, Ghatak-84(Junagagh) Range-21, Division-11, Gujarat issued intimation in Form GST DRC-01A dated 18.12.2023 in connection with the purchase made by the petitioner from M/s.K.S Traders on the ground that the said supplier is not a genuine firm and goods were not physically received by the petitioner and therefore, the Input Tax Credit claimed in respect of such purchase made from M/s.K.S Traders is liable to be reversed along with the interest and penalty.

3.3. It appears that before the petitioner could file reply to the intimation in Form GST DRC-01A, the respondent No.2 issued the showcause notice in Form GST DRC-01 on 06.01.2024, however, the attachment in such Form GST DRC01 was not served upon the petitioner. The petitioner thereafter, filed a reply on 11.01.2024 in response to the summary of showcause notice in Form GST DRC-01 along with the detailed reply dated 10.01.2024 with all documentary evidence of Tax invoices, Transporter’s Lorry Receipt, Transporter’s Delivery Challan, E-Way Bill etc., as well as the copy of the ledger accounts in books of M/s.K.S Traders duly signed and stamped and Bank Statements to justify that the petitioner actually physically received the supply of the goods (in question) and therefore, entitled to the Input Tax Credit.

3.4. The respondent No.2 passed an Order-in Original under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short ‘the GST Act’) on 19.01.2024 without considering the reply and without granting opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner though the same was prayed in the reply dated 10.01.2024.

3.5. The petitioner, being aggrieved, preferred an Appeal before the Appellate Authority on 29th June, 2024 with a delay of 71 days on account of the medical ground. The petitioner also submitted Medical Certificate in support of such delay. However, the respondent No.3-Appellate Authority rejected the Appeal by order dated 18.11.2024 on the ground of delay in view of the provisions of Section 107(4) of the GST Act.

4.1. Learned advocate Mr.Fenil Mehta for the petitioner submitted that the show-cause notice dated 06.01.2024 in Form GST DRC-01 was not served along with the attachment containing the reasons of the show-cause notice. He invited the attention of the Court to Annexure-“C” at page No.23 of the petition, in which the summary of show-cause notice is stated, and page No.24 to submit that the show-cause notice and supporting documents are attached but no such attachments were provided to the petitioner.

4.2. It was further pointed out that the petitioner requested the respondent No.2 to provide an opportunity of hearing in the reply dated 10.01.2024, however, no such opportunity was granted. It was therefore submitted that the impugned show-cause notice and the Orderin-Original were challenged before the Appellate Authority but the Appeal was also dismissed on the ground of delay ignoring the Medical Certificate provided by the petitioner.

4.3. Learned advocate Mr.Fenil Mehta submitted that considering such facts of the case, the impugned Order-in-Original and the Order-in-Appeal may be quashed and set aside and the matter may be remanded back to the respondent No.2 so as to enable the petitioner to raise the contentions before the respondent No.2 in accordance with law.

5.1. On the other hand learned Assistant Government Pleaders appearing for the respondents submitted that sufficient opportunity was granted to the petitioner and the impugned Order-in-Original was passed after taking into consideration the reply filed by the petitioner. It was further submitted that admittedly M/s.K.S.Traders from whom the petitioner has purchased the goods was not a genuine firm as the petitioner admitted that the GST number of the said firm was cancelled by the West Bengal GST Department.

5.2. It was further pointed out that the effective date of cancellation of the GST number of M/s.K.S.Traders was 01.07.2017 and hence, the Input Tax Credit availed by the petitioner was rightly ordered to be reversed with interest and penalty and no interference is required to be made while exercising the extra-ordinary jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned advocates for both the sides, it appears that it is not in dispute that the show-cause notice dated 06.01.2024 in Form GST DRC-01 is without any attachment containing the reasons. It is also apparent from the record that no opportunity was granted by the respondent No.2 to the petitioner as provided under Section 75(4) of the GST Act. Therefore, without further going into the merits of the matter and only in view of breach of principles of natural justice committed by the respondent No.2 while issuing the impugned notice dated 06.01.2024 and passing the impugned Order-in-Original dated 19.01.2024, the matter is required to be remanded back to the respondent No.2 to pass a fresh de-novo order after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner in accordance with law.

7. Therefore, the petition succeeds and the impugned Order-in-Original dated 19.01.2024 is quashed and set aside and respondent No.2 is directed to provide an attachment to the showcause notice dated 06.01.2024 to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order so as to enable the petitioner to file a detailed reply to such show-cause notice and thereafter, after granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, pass a fresh denovo order in accordance with law. Such exercise shall be completed within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

8. With the aforesaid direction, the petition is disposed of. Notice is discharged.

(BHARGAV D. KARIA, J)

(PRANAV TRIVEDI,J)