TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 785X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SH HIGH COURT] , it is very clear that a person proceeding must know that he is required to meet the allegations, which may lead to certain action being taken against him. Apart from that the Bench also held that an opportunity must be given to enable to controvert correct or comment on the evidence or information that may be relevant to the decision. A notice which does not mention the particulars, on which the case against the person is based, cannot provide a foundation for the proceedings that follow. As the order impugned herein refers to Exs.P1 and P2, which were never supplied to the petitioner at any point of time, it can be said without hesitation that the same will be in violation of principles of natural justice. It may be tru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with the 1th Respondent for use against the Petitioner in the proceedings and also granting an opportunity of personal hearing and pass 3. While W.P.No.1832 of 2022 is filed by the same party seeking the following relief: ..to issue an appropriate writ order or direction more particularly a writ in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, declaring the action of the 5th Respondent in issuing impugned notice under section 79(1)(d) of CGS/APGST Act 2017 proposing to conduct Auction of the Petitioner s premises, Door No 16-7-14, a residential house with 58.66 sq yrds on 10.01.2022 to recover Rs 37,34,52,454/ under CGST and SGST as illegal, arbitrary, unjustified and set aside the same, consequentially direct the 6th respondent to conduct in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... authority concerned while directing the petitioner to pay tax of Rs.37,34,52,454/-. In other words, the learned counsel would contend that even as per Section 75(7) of the Act, the petitioner should be given material relied upon by the authority, while passing an order against him. As the order came to be passed without furnishing the material relied upon, the same would be in violation of principles of natural justice. 7. Sri T.C.D. Sekhar, learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax, strenuously opposed the same contending that the petitioner has committed fraud and claimed input tax credit without movement of the vehicle through the check post. He further submits that since the material collected and relied upon by the authority was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e that the vehicles either have not crossed the toll gate or the vehicles which have crossed have come from Telangana to Toll Plaza with a speed of modern racing car. In some occasions, the vehicle has crossed prior to the time of e-way bill generation and some times (in very few occasions) in extra ordinary delay. To the extent of vehicles, checked, it is quite obvious that the taxable person randomly chose the number of vehicles going to Telangana and created a record based on their registration number. It is possible that the scrap has been disposed off locally but efforts were made to show that they were consigned to Telangana. In fact the taxable person himself has conceded in his written statement that they supplied scrap iron to M/s. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se no tax are infinitesimal quantum has to be paid compared to the profit made in the illegal trade. One can continue such Registrations eternally. Therefore, the claim of the taxable person that returns are being filed in all cases and taxes are being paid is incorrect. Further, the taxable person has contended that the detained vehicles were released by the holder of respective registrations each in itself is the evidence of essence. It is surprising as to why the taxable person came to know about each vehicle which were detained and who have released those vehicles. The taxable person may produce evidence if any that in all such cases where the registration holders have themselves come forward and released the goods. 9. Section 75(7) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .Awasthy MANU/SC/0249/2005: (2005)IILLJ461SC). The person proceeded against must know that he is required to meet the allegations which might lead to a certain action being taken against him. ( S.L.Kapoor v. Jagmohan MANU/SC0036/1980: [1981]1SCR 746) . A proper hearing must always include a fair opportunity to those who are parties to the controversy for correcting or contradicting anything prejudicial to their view . (4) A crucial aspect of a fair hearing is having a right to know the grounds or the opposing case in advance. (5) If prejudicial allegations are made against a person he must, normally, be given particulars of them. He must also be enabled to controvert, correct or comment on other evidence or information that may ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
