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 - 2025 (2) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2025 (2) TMI 508 - HC - GST


The issues presented and considered in the judgment are as follows:1. Whether the adjudication order was passed without giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing?2. Whether the adjudication order was passed without granting the petitioner an opportunity to file written notes of reply?3. Whether the petitioner's request for cross-examination of witnesses was denied?4. Whether the adjudication order for the financial year 2017-18 should be quashed?Issue-wise detailed analysis:The petitioner's counsel argued that the adjudication order was passed without affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing, without granting the opportunity to file written notes of reply, and without allowing cross-examination of witnesses. The respondent authorities relied on the adjudication order, which stated that a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner under the WBGST Act, 2017. The petitioner requested an extension of the hearing date, highlighting the need for cross-verification to defend themselves effectively.The respondent authorities contended that the request for cross-examination was not applicable as statements of relevant witnesses had already been recorded in the presence of the authorized representative of the petitioner. They also conducted joint hearings with certain individuals and produced documentary evidence to support their statements. The verification at the place of business of M/s Overseas Transport Co. revealed details that indirectly connected to the petitioner's modus operandi.Significant holdings:The Court held that the petitioner had a statutory remedy available under Section 107A of the GST Act to challenge the reassessment order before an appellate authority. It emphasized that the writ jurisdiction of the High Court cannot be invoked unless under exceptional circumstances when a specific remedy is available. As the petitioner failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances, the Court disposed of the writ petition, clarifying that the dismissal did not prejudice the petitioner's right to avail the appellate remedy within 30 days from the date of the order.In conclusion, the Court dismissed the writ petition, emphasizing the availability of statutory remedies for the petitioner to challenge the adjudication order. The judgment highlighted the importance of following the statutory mechanism for redressal and refrained from intervening through a writ petition in the absence of exceptional circumstances.This summary provides a detailed analysis of the issues presented, the Court's reasoning, key evidence, application of the law to facts, treatment of competing arguments, and the final determinations made by the Court.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates