9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (6) TMI 1030 - HC - GSTViolation of principles of natural justice - no personal hearing was provided to the petitioner - HELD THAT - On examining the show cause notice dated 25.09.2023 it is evident that a personal hearing was offered to the petitioner on 10.10.2023. While the petitioner asserts that two replies were issued on 30.09.2023 and 04.10.2023 the respondent denies receipt thereof and there is no evidence that such replies were uploaded on the GST portal. Hence the petitioner cannot be absolved of all responsibility for the current state of affairs - it is noticeable that no personal hearing was offered in the second show cause notice dated 26.12.2023 and the impugned order was issued one day later on 27.12.2023. Thus the petitioner was deprived of a reasonable opportunity to respond to such show cause notice and be heard in person as required by statute. The impugned order is quashed and the matter is remanded for re-consideration subject to the petitioner remitting 5% of the disputed tax demand within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Petition disposed off by way of remand.
Issues involved: Impugned order challenged due to lack of personal hearing, violation of statutory requirements under Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
Summary: The petitioner, engaged in manufacturing agro chemicals and pesticides, received a notice in Form GST DRC-1 on 25.09.2023, to which they responded on 30.09.2023 and 04.10.2023. Another show cause notice was issued on 26.12.2023, followed by the impugned order on 27.12.2023. The petitioner contended that the respondent failed to provide a personal hearing as requested, alleging a violation of statutory provisions. The respondent, represented by learned Government Advocate, claimed not to have received the petitioner's replies dated 30.09.2023 and 04.10.2023, acknowledging only the reply dated 18.10.2023. The respondent argued that a personal hearing was offered earlier but not utilized by the petitioner. However, it was noted that no personal hearing was offered in the second show cause notice, depriving the petitioner of a fair opportunity to respond as mandated by law. Upon examination, it was found that a personal hearing was offered in the initial show cause notice, but discrepancies existed regarding the receipt of the petitioner's replies. Despite some responsibility falling on the petitioner, the lack of a personal hearing in the subsequent notice rendered the impugned order invalid. The court quashed the order and remanded the matter for reconsideration, with the condition that the petitioner remit 5% of the disputed tax demand within three weeks. The petitioner was granted the opportunity to reply to the show cause notice and, upon compliance, the respondent was directed to issue a fresh order within two months, ensuring a personal hearing. The case was disposed of with no costs, and related motions were closed accordingly.
|
