A Division bench of the Bombay High Court comprising of Justice M.S. Sonak and Justice Jitendra Jain has allowed Pepperfry to file a reply to GST Show Cause Notice subject to the cost of Rs. 50K.
Table of Contents
Background
The show cause notice required the petitioner to file a response within 30 days. The notice clearly indicates the date, timing, and venue of the personal hearing. The Petitioner sought time to file a reply. The defence that the show cause notice was not uploaded on the petitioner’s designated portal is not convincing. There was undoubtedly some delay in responding to the show cause notice on the petitioner’s part.
The petitioner did file a response, seeking some time to file a detailed reply. Though the response was belated, the same was filed before the impugned order was made. The record shows that the impugned order was digitally signed on 25 June 2023. By that date, at least, the petitioner’s response was before the 4th respondent.
Besides, though the reason for the show cause notice not being uploaded on the petitioner’s portal is not very convincing, given the fact that the order was made or digitally signed, the petitioner deserves to be granted an opportunity of hearing subject to the petitioner paying costs.
The opportunity would address the argument about natural justice without prejudicing the revenue’s interests disproportionately.
Conclusion
The court held that after a reply is filed, the respondent-department should dispose of the show cause notice after considering the reply and hearing the petitioner. The show cause notice must be disposed of as expeditiously as possible and, in any event, within eight weeks of receiving the reply if the same is filed.
The court granted the relief is granted to Petitioner subject to paying cost of Rs.50,000 to be paid within two weeks to the Prime Minister’s Relief Fund, and the payment of such costs shall be a pre-condition for receiving the benefit of the order.
Case Details
Case Title: Pepperfry Limited Versus UOI
Case No.: Writ Petition No. 3682 Of 2023
Date: 17/10/2024
Counsel For Petitioner: Bharat Raichandani
Counsel For Respondent: Jaymala Ostwal
