Home Case Index All Cases GST GST + HC GST - 2024 (8) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (8) TMI 1483 - HC - GSTRejection of petitioner's miscellaneous application - only ground on which the order-in-appeal dismissing the petitioner's appeal was passed is that petitioner has not filed the Board Resolution authorising the Director who verified the appeal - HELD THAT - The order-in-appeal dated 18 th July 2024 set aside and matter remanded for de novo consideration. Appellate Authority who will hear this appeal shall give personal hearing to Appellant, notice whereof shall be communicated at least 5 working days in advance. The order to be passed shall be a reasoned order dealing with all submissions of Appellant. If the Appellate Authority is going to rely on any order or judgment of any Court or Tribunal or any other forum, a list thereof shall be made available along with the notice for personal hearing. If the order or a judgment is unreported then a copy thereof shall also be made available along with the notice. This is to enable Appellant to deal with/distinguish the judgment or the order. The appeal shall be disposed by 30th November 2024.
Issues:
Challenge to order-in-appeal based on lack of Board Resolution authorizing the signatory. Analysis: The petition challenges an order-in-appeal dated 18th July 2024, which dismissed the petitioner's appeal due to the absence of a Board Resolution authorizing the signatory who verified the appeal. The petitioner was not asked to provide this resolution. In a similar case, a previous order was set aside by the Court, emphasizing the importance of verifying the authority of the signatory. The Court highlighted that the Appellate Authority should have checked the GST portal to confirm the signatory's authorization. The Court ordered a remand for de novo consideration, stressing the need for a reasoned order and a fair hearing for the appellant. The appeal was to be disposed of by 30th November 2024, with all rights and contentions kept open for the parties. The Court clarified that no observations were made on the case's merits. Ms. Vyas, representing the Respondent, acknowledged the lack of sufficient notice for the petition but suggested disposing of the case in line with the previous similar writ petition. Consequently, the Court set aside the order-in-appeal from 18th July 2024 and remanded the matter for de novo consideration. The Appellate Authority was directed to provide a personal hearing to the Appellant with advance notice and to issue a reasoned order addressing all submissions. Any reliance on external orders or judgments was to be disclosed to the Appellant beforehand. The appeal was to be finalized by 30th November 2024, with all rights and contentions remaining open. The Court reiterated that no comments were made on the case's merits before disposing of the petition.
|