MS BABAJI BAGS A PROPRIETARY FIRM vs UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF FINANCE DEPARTMENT RESPONDANT OF REVENUE OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX & ORS.

2024-02-20 Information

$~21
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment delivered on: 20.02.2024
+ W.P.(C) 1827/2024 & CM APPL. 7642/2024, 10221/2024

MS BABAJI BAGS A PROPRIETARY FIRM ….. Petitioner
versus
UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF FINANCE DEPARTMENT RESPONDANT OF REVENUE OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX & ORS. ….. Respondents

Advocates who appeared in this case:

For the Petitioner: Mr. Badri Prasad Singh, Advocate.

For the Respondent: Mr. Atul Tripathi, SC (CGST) Mr. Raghwendra Tiwari, SPC with Ms. Mamta Tiwari, Adv. for R-1.

CORAM:-
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

JUDGMENT

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. Petitioner impugns order dated 21.11.2023 whereby the show cause notice dated 30.08.2022 has been adjudicated and a demand created against the petitioner.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner never received any communication with regard to the hearing and the communication alleged to have been sent by the respondent was sent on an incorrect e-mail address.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has always been communicating by using only one e-mail address i.e. ajaykukreja2015@gmail.com. The statement is taken on record. The department is directed to communicate with the petitioner by using the aforementioned e-mail address.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the communication was sent on the e-mail address of the person who had registered the petitioner. He submits that there seems to be an error in the department on account of change of officers. He concedes that the intimation was not sent on the above e-mail address but on another address.
5. Keeping in view of the fact that petitioner was never intimated about the hearing on the show cause notice, we are of the view that the matter calls for a remit so that the petitioner can be given an opportunity of hearing.
6. In view of the above, the impugned order dated 21.11.2023 is set aside. The matter is remitted to the adjudicating authority to adjudicate the show cause notice dated 30.08.2022 afresh.
7. We are informed by learned counsel for the petitioner that an application has already been filed by the petitioner seeking the rectification of mistake committed by the petitioner in Form GSTR-3B for the period July, 2017 to November, 2018 and the application has till date not been disposed of.
8. We direct the Competent Authority to consider the application filed by the petitioner for rectification of the mistake in accordance with law.
9. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J

FEBRUARY 20, 2024 RAVINDER DUDEJA, J
sa

W.P.(C) 1827/2024 Page 1 of 3