MANOJ KUMAR MEWARA V. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICE TAX AND CENTRAL EXCISE

WPC/3538/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Manoj Kumar Mewara, the petitioner, who was the erstwhile partner of Maruti Minerals, a partnership firm engaged in transportation and mineral trading. The firm was dissolved on 31.03.2018, and the petitioner notified the Income Tax Officer about the dissolution. However, a recovery notice dated 18.07.2023 served to the petitioner revealed an Order in Original passed against the firm on 19.05.2022, based on a show-cause notice dated 18.12.2020, which the petitioner claimed he never received. The respondents provided evidence of dispatch but no proof of delivery. The court found that the show-cause notice was not properly served, leading to the quashing of the notice and the order, and remanding the case for a fresh decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 689972 (HC-JHARKHAND)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 17-04-2025
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Finance Act, 1994
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: P A S PATI; ANURAG VIJAY
• Assessee Lawyers: VIKAS PANDEY
• Keywords: Natural Justice; Order-in-Original; Show cause notice; Writ application
• Section: 73

Judgement Text

" 2025:JHHC:11583-DB 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(T) No. 3538 of 2024 -------- Manoj Kumar Mewara, Aged about 56 Years, Son of Late Nagarmull Mewara, Resident of Flat No 2601 Sri Ram Chandra Gardens, P.O. Gonda P.S. Gonda District Ranchi. … … Petitioner(s) Versus 1. Principal Commissioner, Central Goods & Service Tax and Central Excise, having his Office at Central Revenue Building, 5-A, Mahatma Gandhi Road, P.O. Donranda, P.S. Chutia, District Ranchi-834 001. 2. Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods & Service Tax and Central Excise, Ranchi North Division, 6th Floor Mahavir Tower, P.O. G.P.O, P.S. Hindpiri, District Ranchi-834 001. … … Respondent(s) CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN For the Petitioner : Mr. Vikas Pandey, Advocate For the Respondent-CGST : Mr. P. A. S. Pati, Advocate Mr. Anurag Vijay, Advocate -------- JUDGMENT CAV On 20/03/2025 Pronounced On 17/04/2025 Per Deepak Roshan, J. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner for the following reliefs: “a) For a direction on Respondent No-2 to serve copy of the Order in Original No 360/DC/0I0/R&D/2022-23 dated 19.05.2022 alongwith the connected Show Cause Notice dated 18.12.2020, as the petitioner has neither been served with any Show Cause Notice in terms of Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 nor said Order In Original Number No 360/DC/0I0/R&D/2022-23 dated 19.05.2022, which has deprived the Petitioner to avail the statutory remedies of Appeal as available under the provisions of the said Act. b) For any other appropriate direction deemed fit by this Hon'ble Court.” 2. The fact of the case lies in a narrow compass. The petitioner is the erstwhile partner of a partnership Firm, namely, Maruti Minerals which stood dissolved by virtue of deed of dissolution dated 31.03.2018 with effect from 31.03.2018. The Firm before its 2025:JHHC:11583-DB 2 dissolution was engaged in the business of transporting and mineral trading. After the deed of dissolution dated 31.03.2018, an intimation letter was also given to the Income Tax Officer Ward No.2 (1), Ranchi vide letter dated 15.09.2021. 3. The grievance of the Petitioner is that all of a sudden, he was served with recovery notice dated 18.07.2023. On perusal of the said notice, it came to the knowledge of the Petitioner that Order in Original with respect to one case was passed on 19.05.2022 itself against the Partnership Firm. On enquiry, from the respondent- Department the Petitioner came to know about passing of the said Order in Original in connection with a show-cause notice dated 18.12.2020 and pursuant thereto; he made several requests to the Respondent-department to furnish the Order in Original. The specific case of the petitioner is that he has been served with the show-cause notice so that he could have replied to the same and the Order in Original has been passed behind his back; even the same has not been served to him. As such, the same may be quashed. 4. A counter affidavit has been filed in this case wherein it has been specifically stated at para 9 that the show cause- cum- demand notice dated 08.12.2020 was sent on the postal address of the Petitioner which was available on record by Speed Post on the very same address on which Petitioner has received instant letter. The Respondents have also annexed the photo copy of the relevant page 2025:JHHC:11583-DB 3 of dispatch register as well as copy of BNPL Booking Journal as token of proof. However, no receipt of either show-cause notice or Order in Original could be brought for record. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the documents available on record specially the dispatch register (Annexure-A to the counter affidavit) and Speed Post chart (Annexure-B to the counter affidavit), it transpires that the same has been dispatched but no documents, whatsoever, has been brought on record to prove the service of notice to the petitioner. At this stage, it is pertinent to mention here that in any transaction through Speed Post, the receipt is generated after service of document. As such, it cannot be said that mere dispatch of the document is suffice to prove the service of notice. Thus, we are of the considered view that the show-cause notice itself was not served to the Petitioner and that is the reason, he could not appear before the authority to defend his case. 6. In this peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered opinion that interest of justice would be sufficed by remitting the case back to the Respondent no.2 who has issued the show-cause notice to decide the case afresh after following principle of natural justice. 7. Accordingly, the instant writ application stands allowed and the purported show-cause notice dated 18.12.2020 and the Order 2025:JHHC:11583-DB 4 in Original No. 360/DC/0I0/R&D/2022-23 dated 19.05.2022, are hereby, quashed and set-aside. The 2nd Respondent is directed to issue fresh show-cause notice and proceed in the matter strictly in accordance with law and following of principle of natural justice. 8. Pending I.A, if any, also stands disposed of. (M. S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J.) (Deepak Roshan, J.) Amit A.F.R "