Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases GST GST + HC GST - 2021 (6) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2021 (6) TMI 772 - HC - GST


Issues:
Assessment order confirming CGST amount due to failure to file GSTR-3B inclusive of penalty and interest - Breach of principles of natural justice - Opportunity of personal hearing denied - Compliance with Section 75(4) of the CGST Act required.

Analysis:
The petitioner, an assessee, challenged the assessment order passed by the 1st respondent confirming a CGST amount on taxable supply declared in GSTR-I for the year 2019-20 due to failure to file GSTR-3B along with penalty and interest. The petitioner contended that no opportunity of hearing was provided despite a revised show-cause notice, citing a decision of the Gujarat High Court in support. The Government Pleader argued that a hearing was extended upon issuance of the initial notice, which the petitioner did not insist upon during the revised notice. However, the petitioner disputed this claim. The Court examined the records and noted a clear demand for a personal hearing, emphasizing the importance of Section 75(4) of the CGST Act in granting such an opportunity.

The Court highlighted that Section 75(4) mandates granting an opportunity of hearing upon a written request from the person chargeable with tax or penalty or when an adverse decision is contemplated against them. In this case, the petitioner had clearly requested a personal hearing, which was disregarded leading to the passing of the impugned assessment order. The Court emphasized that procedural requirements, especially regarding natural justice like the opportunity of hearing, must be strictly adhered to. Denial of such an opportunity hinders the assessee from effectively responding to complex factual and legal issues, necessitating the setting aside of the assessment order.

Consequently, the Court allowed the Writ Petition, setting aside the assessment order and remanding the matter to the assessing authority for fresh consideration after providing a personal hearing to the petitioner. The assessing authority was directed to pass an appropriate order within two months from the date of the Court's communication, with a restriction on unnecessary adjournments. The Court clarified that it did not delve into the merits of the case, leaving other issues raised in the writ petition open for independent consideration by the assessing authority in accordance with the law. No costs were awarded, and any pending Miscellaneous Petitions related to the Writ Petition were to be closed as a result of the judgment.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates