Order released without giving notice is contrary to the principles of natural justice


Last updated: 14 December 2024
Quick Summary
The Madras High Court has ruled that issuing an order without providing proper notice to the affected party violates the fundamental principles of natural justice. In this case, goods belonging to Tvl. Spark Bio Gas (P.) Ltd. were detained, and an order imposing penalties was made without giving the company an opportunity to present its defence. The court found this to be a breach of natural justice and directed that the goods be released upon the petitioner providing satisfactory security, with new proceedings to be initiated correctly.

Court :
Madras High Court

Brief :
The Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case Tvl. Spark Bio Gas (P.) Ltd v. State Tax Officer (FAC), Vellore [W.P. 19801/2024 dated July 31, 2024] held that an order released without giving proper notice is contrary to principles of natural justice.

Citation :
W.P. 19801/2024 dated July 31, 2024

The Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case Tvl. Spark Bio Gas (P.) Ltd v. State Tax Officer (FAC), Vellore [W.P. 19801/2024 dated July 31, 2024] held that an order released without giving proper notice is contrary to principles of natural justice.

Facts:

Tvl. Spark Bio Gas (P.) Ltd. ("the Petitioner") is a wholly owned subsidiary of M/s. Mahasakthi Bio Enercon Private Limited ("the Holding Company"). The holding company specialised in the production and bottling of bio-CNG and was awarded the concession by the Greater Chennai Corporation for the construction of six biogas plants. For fulfilment of the said purpose CEID Consultants and Engineering Private Limited ("the CEID") agreed to supply goods by procuring them from Power Hydrotech Private Limited ("the Power Hyderotech"). The transportation of the goods was to happen on "bill to ship" basic form Gujrat to Chennai with the petitioner named as consignee in the tax invoice.

The goods were intercepted by the authorities on the way from Gujrat to Chennai. The Notices that were issued in Form GST MOV-1 and MOV-2 mentioned only CIED and Power Hydrotech. Despite this the order ("the Impugned Order") dated May 27, 2024 imposed penalties on the petitioner under section 129 of applicable GST statutes.

The petitioner contended that the impugned order was against the principles of natural justice as the petitioner was never given a chance to defend.

Issue:

Whether the issuing order without giving a chance to defend contrary to principles of Natural Justice?

Held:

The Hon'ble Madras High Court in W.P 19801/2024 held as under:

· Observed that the petitioners were not served notice and were also not part of the proceeding and issuing an order against them was a violation of principles of natural justice.

· Held that the impinged order was in contradiction of principles of natural justice.

· Observed that, under Section 129(1)(c) of the applicable GST enactments the goods can be released upon furnishing proper bank guarantee or other security.

· Directed that, the goods to be realised upon the petitioner providing satisfactory security.

· Directed, the authorities to initiate new proceedings against the petitioner in accordance with the law.

Our Comments:

Section 129 of the Central Goods and Servies Act "Detention, seizure and release of goods and conveyances in transit" serves primarily the compliance of GST laws in I transportation of goods. It says:

  • The goods with suspicion of tax evasion can be detained.
  • The goods can be released upon payment of due taxes and penalties.
  • If the goods are not released within 7 days action is to be taken under Section 130.
  • Proper notice tie be given to reply before issuing an order of penalty.

OFFICIAL JUDGMENT COPY HAS BEEN ATTACHED

FAQ :

The Madras High Court ruled that an order released without giving proper notice to the party concerned is contrary to the principles of natural justice.

The petitioner in this case was Tvl. Spark Bio Gas (P.) Ltd.

The petitioner contended that the order was against the principles of natural justice because they were never given a chance to defend themselves or present their case.

The court directed that the goods be released upon the petitioner providing satisfactory security, such as a bank guarantee.

The court directed the authorities to initiate new proceedings against the petitioner in accordance with the law, ensuring proper notice is given.

 

Bimal Jain
Published in GST
Views : 132
downloaded 257 times

Comments




CCI Pro

Follow us
add to google news


Company
14 July 2026
Senior Executive/ Manager

H S SHARMA AND CO

Pune

CA Final

View Details
Company
05 July 2026
Financial Controller

NovumLake Partners

Mumbai

CA

View Details
Company
21 July 2026
Chartered Accountant

Keshri & Associates

Thiruvananthapuram

CA

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 14 July 2026
Article Assistants

R Shyam and Associates

New Delhi

CA Final

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 16 July 2026
CA Article

Pipara & Co. LLP.

Mumbai

CA Inter

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 16 July 2026
Article Assistant

G A R U D & Associates

New Delhi

CA Inter

View Details
Company
13 July 2026
AVP / VP - PCG Advisory

Workforce Connect

Mumbai

MBA

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 30 June 2026
Taxation Content Writer Intern

Interactive Media Pvt Ltd.

New Delhi

CA Inter

View Details