Same Officer Acted As Authorizing Authority For Inspection As Well As Appellate Authority: Rajasthan High Court Quashes GST Appeal Order

The High Court was considering a writ petition seeking issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing the impugned order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Appellate Authority, Commercial Taxes Department, Zone-Bharatpur, Rajasthan.

The Division Bench of Justice Sangeeta Sharma and Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati held, “This Court, without going into the merits of the case and confining itself to the limited submission advanced on behalf of the petitioner, as also in view of the fact that it is not disputed by the respondents that the same officer acted as the authorizing authority for inspection and search under Section 67 of the Act of 2017 and thereafter functioned as the Appellate Authority under Section 107 of the Act of 2017, is inclined to make limited interference in the matter. Consequently, the appellate order dated 11.12.2023 passed under Section 107 of the Act of 2017 is quashed and set aside.”

Advocate Akshay Sharma represented the Petitioner while Additional Advocate General Mahi Yadav represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

The search and survey proceedings were initiated in pursuance of the authorisation for inspection and search conducted by the Additional Commissioner under Section 67(2) of the Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (Act of 2017) read with Rule 139(1) of the RGST Rules, 2017. Upon conclusion of the inspection and search proceedings, a Show Cause notice was issued, and thereafter, the order was passed against the petitioner firm. Aggrieved by the order, the petitioner firm preferred an appeal under Section 107(1) before the Appellate Authority, but the same came to be dismissed.

Arguments

One of the arguments raised by the Petitioner was that the authorisation for inspection and search was issued by the Additional Commissioner and the same officer, in his capacity as the Appellate Authority under Section 107 of the Act of 2017, thereafter presided over and decided the statutory appeal arising from proceedings initiated pursuant to the very authorisation issued by him. It was contended that such dual exercise of power offends the foundational principle of natural justice that no person shall be a judge in his own cause (nemo judex in causa sua).

Reasoning

The Bench took note of the fact that the same officer acted as the authorising authority for inspection and search under Section 67 and thereafter functioned as the Appellate Authority under Section 107.

The Bench thus remanded the matter back to the Appellate Authority with a direction that the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order be decided afresh by any competent Appellate Authority other than the Additional Commissioner, Commercial Taxes Department, Bharatpur.

Cause Title: M/s Ramjilal Mohanlal v. Union Of India (Case No.: D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7616/2024)

Appearance

Petitioner: Advocates Akshay Sharma, Dheeraj Kumar

Respondent: Additional Advocate General Mahi Yadav, Advocates Manaswia Nakwaal, Rohan Mittal, Arnav Singh, Dhairya Agarwal, Sandeep Pathak

Click here to read/download Order