9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (3) TMI 133 - HC - GSTUnilateral appropriation of a part of refundable amount in terms of the FORM-GST-RFD-06 - Show Cause Notice (SCN) not issued - recovery of dues - HELD THAT - the respondents being statutory authorities, need to practice fairness while dealing with a citizen and that, the unilateral recovery by way of appropriation falls short of fairness standards which the respondents are expected to maintain. This writ petition succeeds in part; that part of the impugned which appropriated a portion of refundable amount having been set at naught, the other part has been left intact; matter is remitted to the answering respondent for consideration afresh after hearing the petitioner or his agent, within a period of eight weeks.
Issues:
Unilateral appropriation of refundable amount against arguable dues without notice to the Assessee under the Central Goods & Services Act, 2017. Analysis: The petitioner challenged the unilateral appropriation of a part of the refundable amount against dues of other Assessment Year/s without prior notice. The Court acknowledged the petitioner's contention that such appropriation without notice to the Assessee goes against the principles of natural justice. The Court highlighted that the respondents, being statutory authorities, must act fairly towards citizens, and unilateral recovery through appropriation lacks fairness. The Court emphasized that while the Act empowers respondents to recover taxes, interest, and penalties, the exercise of such power should not exclude the Assessee's right to a hearing. Thus, the Court found that the impugned decision of appropriation should not have been made unilaterally. The Court granted partial relief to the petitioner, setting aside the part of the impugned order that appropriated a portion of the refundable amount. The matter was remitted back to the responding respondent for reconsideration after giving the petitioner or their agent an opportunity to be heard within eight weeks. The respondents were permitted to request necessary information or documents from the petitioner for the fresh consideration, but unnecessary delays were discouraged. The Court emphasized that the responding respondent must inform the petitioner of the reconsideration result, failing which would be viewed seriously. No costs were awarded in the present judgment.
|
