The Karnataka High Court disposed of the petition challenging ...

Court Upholds Fair Hearing Requirement for Challenging CGST and KGST Act's Section 16(4) Validity.

November 14, 2024

Case Laws GST HC

The Karnataka High Court disposed of the petition challenging the constitutional validity of Section 16(4) of the CGST and KGST Act, 2017, which was alleged to be violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 300A of the Constitution. The Court relied on its previous judgment in M/s. Sadhana Enviro Engineering Services vs. Joint Commissioner of Central Tax & others, where it held that in view of the amendment inserting Section 16(5), the petitioner should be given a reasonable opportunity and heard by the original authority, which should then proceed in accordance with law. Consequently, the present petition was allowed and disposed of in terms of the earlier judgment, directing the authorities to implement the provisions after granting a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The Karnataka High Court disposed of the petition challenging ...

Court Upholds Fair Hearing Requirement for Challenging CGST and KGST Act's Section 16(4) Validity.

November 14, 2024

Case Laws GST HC

You may also like:

HC upheld validity of Rule 36(4) of CGST Rules, dismissing constitutional challenge. Court determined Rule 36(4) derives authority from Section 16 of CGST Act and...

The HC held that an officer appointed under Section 6 of the Karnataka GST Act qualifies as a proper officer under Section 4 of the IGST Act through cross-empowerment...

The Allahabad High Court addressed the denial of a personal hearing in a tax assessment case, emphasizing the mandatory nature of such hearings u/s 75(4) of the U.P. GST...

Market fee/mandi shulk - Whether ghee is a product of livestock - The majority opinion of the Full Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court upheld the validity of the 1994...

HC set aside respondent's order concerning input tax credit under Section 16(4) of CGST Act, 2017. The matter was remanded back to respondent No.7 for fresh...

Writ petition challenging validity of Section 17(5)(d) of CGST Act, 2017 and Section 17(5)(d) of TNGST Act, 2017 dismissed. Supreme Court recently upheld validity of...

Interpretation of statute - word ‘or’ is used in section 75(4) of the UPGST Act, 2017 - opportunity of personal hearing was not afforded - Relying on statutory...

HC allows writ petition challenging GST recovery order due to violation of natural justice principles. The court found that mandatory personal hearing under Section...

The High Court quashed refund rejection orders for lack of opportunity for personal hearing as mandated by Rule 92(3) of CGST Rules, 2017, violating principles of...

HC dismissed the petition challenging tax proceedings, finding no violation of natural justice. The petitioner received hearing notice but failed to appear, and the...

The Calcutta High Court found a violation of principles of natural justice as the impugned order was passed without giving the petitioners an opportunity of hearing as...

Determination of tax - Procedure prescribed u/s 75(4) of CGST not followed - Validity of assessment order - violation of principles of natural justice - requirement of...

The impugned order violated principles of natural justice by failing to provide an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner, despite a written request, contravening...

The High Court addressed a challenge to an adjudication order u/s 78 of Finance Act, 1994 read with Section 174 of CGST Act, 2017. The Court emphasized that while...

The court held that u/s 75(4) of the GST Act, an opportunity for personal hearing must be granted if requested in writing by the person liable for tax or penalty, or if...

Quick Updates: