Page 82 - GSTL_14th May 2020_Vol 36_Part 2

184 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 36
to take a decision afresh. The petitioner will immediately furnish his written
submission in the matter before the 1st respondent along with a certified copy of
this judgment and this may be done within a period of 10 days from the date of
receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Thereafter the 1st respondent shall
issue notice of hearing to the petitioner by registered post with acknowledge-
ment due and thereafter the 1st respondent will grant reasonable opportunity of
personal hearing to the petitioner through his authorised representative/counsel,
if any, and then will take a considered decision thereon in accordance with law.
5. Before parting with this case, this Court would only venture to ob-
serve that in cases of this nature, elementary Cannons of natural justice and fair-
ness would require that the party should be personally heard by the decision
maker either in person or through authorised representative/counsel, if any, and
thereafter a considered decision is taken thereon, instead of driving the affected
party like the present petitioner having to approach this Court and then litigate
the matter on account of violation of natural justice. It is trite and it is too elemen-
tary to require the citation of any judicial authority that where the decision taken
by the decision maker would inflict adverse civil consequence on the affected
party, then the elementary principles of reasonableness, fairness and natural jus-
tice would require that the affected party is heard by the decision maker before
the latter renders decision thereon. The 2nd respondent Commissioner or the
Head of the Department concerned may ensure that necessary instructions are
given to the officials concerned in the Department so that unnecessary litigations
of this nature could be easily avoided. The affected party cannot be blamed for
approaching the court for ventilating his grievances and if elementary principles
of natural justice and fairness are adhered to by the decision maker, the litiga-
tions of this nature could be substantially reduced.
6. With these observations and directions, the Writ Petition (Civil)
stands finally disposed of.

_______

2020 (36) G.S.T.L. 184 (Cal.)

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Shekhar B. Saraf, J.
AMAZONITE STEEL PVT. LTD.
Versus
UNION OF INDIA
W.P. No. 18429 (W) of 2019 with W.P. Nos. 18431 (W), 18433 (W), 21272 (W),
21273 (W) & 21274 (W) of 2019, decided on 4-3-2020
Bank account - Provisional attachment of bank account - Jurisdiction to
issue order - ‘Principal Commissioner of Central Tax’ equated to “Principal
Additional Director of Central Tax’ and “Commissioner of Central Tax’ as
‘Additional Director General of Central Tax’ - Fresh orders of provisional
attachment in terms of Section 83 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
passed by ‘Principal Additional Director of Central Tax’ within power pos-

GST LAW TIMES  14th May 2020  82