9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (10) TMI 32 - HC - GSTMaintainability of appeal - Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017 - appellate order or not - levy of tax and penalty - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - It has been observed that the appeal was preferred on 31.01.2020 before the appellate authority, thereafter no one appeared on behalf of the appellant. The appeal of the petitioner has been dismissed without affording any opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. It is deemed appropriate to grant an opportunity to the petitioner to appear before the appellate authority and accordingly direct that the petitioner shall appear before the appellate authority on 29.10.2021 and the appellate authority shall afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass a fresh order without being influenced by the order dated 16.03.2020 passed in the appeal. Petition disposed off.
Issues:
Challenge to imposition of tax and penalty under GST Act, 2017 Dismissal of appeal without hearing the appellant Analysis: The petitioner filed a petition under Article 226 challenging the imposition of tax and penalty under the GST Act, 2017 through orders dated 03.12.2019 and 16.03.2020. The petitioner's appeal under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017 was rejected without hearing the appellant due to the absence of the petitioner's counsel during the hearing. The petitioner claimed that they were unaware of the dismissal of the appeal as it was not communicated by their local counsel. The High Court noted that the appeal was dismissed without giving the petitioner an opportunity to be heard, which was a violation of principles of natural justice. The High Court reviewed the facts and directed that the petitioner be given a chance to appear before the appellate authority on 29.10.2021. The appellate authority was instructed to provide a hearing to the petitioner and issue a fresh order, disregarding the previous order dated 16.03.2020. The Court clarified that its decision did not imply any judgment on the case's merits. The writ petition was disposed of with this direction, ensuring that the petitioner received a fair opportunity to present their case before the appellate authority.
|
