2021 (12) TMI 1222 - HC - GST

Violation of principles of natural justice - validity of assessment order - opportunity of personal hearing as is contemplated under Section 75(4) of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, not provided - HELD THAT - Though specifically the petitioner has not requested for a personal hearing in the aforesaid reply/representation, the respondents have proceeded to pass the impugned orders by confirming the demand proposed in the notice. As adverse orders would have been passed against the petitioner, it was incumbent on the part of the respondents to issue a notice of personal hearing to the petitioner. Though in this case, admittedly the petitioner had filed the reply belatedly on 16.08.2021 having considered the reply and having decided to pass an adverse order, it was incumbent on the part of the respondents to call upon the petitioner for a personal hearing. The impugned orders stand quashed and these cases are remitted back to the respondents to pass a speaking order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner on the reply/representation made by the petitioner on 16.08.2021 - Writ Petitions stand disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Opportunity of personal hearing as per Section 75(4) of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Analysis:
The High Court of Madras heard the case where the impugned orders were passed without granting an opportunity of personal hearing as required by Section 75(4) of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The court noted that the petitioner had replied to the Show Cause Notices belatedly but without specifically requesting a personal hearing. Despite this, the respondents proceeded to pass adverse orders without providing an opportunity for a personal hearing, which was deemed necessary. The court emphasized that even though the reply was late, the respondents should have called for a personal hearing before passing adverse orders. Consequently, the impugned orders were quashed, and the cases were remitted back to the respondents to pass a speaking order after giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing based on their reply/representation.

The court further directed that the respondents must furnish copies of the relied-upon documents in the Show Cause Notices before passing any new orders. Additionally, the respondents were given the liberty to issue a suitable corrigendum to the Show Cause Notice within fifteen days, and the petitioner was required to reply within thirty days thereafter. Subsequently, the respondents were instructed to pass a fresh speaking order within sixty days, ensuring that the deadlines were set to expedite the proceedings without affecting the period of limitation for passing the order. The petitioner was directed to appear for a first hearing on a specified date.

In conclusion, the Writ Petitions were disposed of with the above directions, and no costs were imposed. The connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions were closed accordingly.