9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (11) TMI 549 - HC - GSTViolation of principles of natural justice - non consideration of the reply so filed - HELD THAT - Evident it is from the show cause notice dated 05.02.2022 that a response was to be filed by the petitioner latest by 20.02.2022, which the petitioner in fact had filed a day prior thereto on 19.02.2022. The impugned order does not reflect consideration of the reply so filed and only on this ground, as there is a violation of principles of natural justice and non consideration of the reply so filed, the order dated 06.06.2022 is hereby quashed and set aside. It is clarified that this Court has not gone into the merits of the issue and the authorities are free to pass a fresh order after consideration of the response filed by the petitioner on 19.02.2022 and after giving personal hearing to the petitioner from the stage of DRC-01. The petition is partly allowed.
Issues involved: Whether an opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner before passing an order in Form GST DRC-7.
Summary: The High Court of Gujarat heard the case regarding whether the petitioner was provided with an opportunity of hearing before the order in Form GST DRC-7 was passed. The petitioner, a partnership firm, received a notice under Sec. 61 of the CGST / GGST, followed by a show cause notice in Form GST DRC-01 for the financial year 2019-2020. The petitioner responded to the show cause notice by filing a detailed reply on 19.02.2022, before the deadline of 20.02.2022. However, the impugned order dated 06.06.2022 was passed without considering the petitioner's response, based on an incorrect assumption that the reply was due by 14.02.2022. The Court observed that the petitioner had indeed submitted a response before the deadline specified in the show cause notice, thereby fulfilling the requirement. Due to the non-consideration of the filed reply and a violation of principles of natural justice, the order dated 06.06.2022 was quashed and set aside. The Court clarified that it did not delve into the merits of the issue and directed the authorities to reconsider the case after taking into account the petitioner's response filed on 19.02.2022 and providing a personal hearing to the petitioner from the stage of DRC-01. The petition was partly allowed, and the rule was made absolute to the specified extent.
|
