Clipped from: https://www.taxscan.in/personal-hearing-to-be-granted-only-after-receipt-of-reply-and-where-contemplation-of-adverse-decision-against-petitioner-madras-hc-read-order/254939/?utm_source=izooto&utm_medium=push_notifications&utm_campaign=Personal%20Hearing%20to%20be%20granted%20only%20after%20receipt%20of%20reply%20and%20where%20contemplation%20of%20adverse%20decision%20against%20petitioner:%20Madras%20HC
In a recent decision the Madras High Court observed that personal hearing to be granted only after receipt of reply and where contemplation of adverse decision against petitioner.
The petitioner, Shree Shyam Granites and Marbles, has challenged the impugned orders, passed by the respondent under the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Act, 2017 (TNGST Act, 2017) on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice.
The petitioner contended that in the replies sent by the petitioner to the show cause notices, the petitioner has informed the respondent that there isno mismatch. According to them, the supplier Bills were reported in the GST return for the next month and a copy of the Bill as well as the return copy were also enclosed by the petitioner along with the respective replies.
The defects pointed out by the respondent in the impugned show cause notices have been clarified by the petitioner in their replies. However, in theassessment order, no reasons have been given by the respondent for rejecting the petitioner’s replies.
Section 75 (4) of the TNGST Act, 2017 reads as follows: ” An opportunity of hearing shall be granted where a request is received in writing from the person chargeable with tax or penalty or where any adverse decision is contemplated against such person.”
The Court of Justice Abdul Quddhose observed that “Only after receipt of the reply and only in cases where the respondent contemplates an adverse decision against the petitioner, a personal hearing will have to be granted and not before a reply is received from the petitioner, that too when the reply has been duly acknowledged in the impugned orders.”
The Court also noted that “The principles of natural justice has been violated by the respondent before passing of the impugned assessment order.”To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to TaxscanAdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
Shree Shyam Granites and Marbles Rep. by its Sole Proprietor vs The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC)
Counsel for Appellant: Mr.Adithya Reddy
Counsel for Respondent: Mr.TNC Kaushik Additional Government Pleader
CITATION: 2023 TAXSCAN (HC) 355
Be the First to get the Best
Join Our email list to get the latest Tax Updates , Special Offers, Events delivered right to your Inbox
Email Address *