9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (3) TMI 491 - HC - GSTViolation of principles of natural justice - Issuance of undated notice under Section 73(1) of the C.G.S.T/ U.P.G.S.T. Act, 2017 - reasonable time to the petitioner to submit his reply to the show cause notice granted or not - HELD THAT - In view of the application of the petitioner dated 16.11.2021, the respondent No.3 should have granted a reasonable time to the petitioner to submit his reply to the show cause notice. Thus, non-compliance of principles of natural justice renders the impugned order to be unsustainable. The impugned order dated 27.11.2021 under Section 73(9) of the C.G.S.T/U.P.G.S.T. Act, 2017 passed by the respondent No.3, is hereby quashed. The matter is remitted back to the respondent No.3 to pass an order afresh in accordance with law - Petition allowed by way of remand.
Issues:
Violation of principles of natural justice in the impugned order dated 27.11.2021 under Section 73(9) of the C.G.S.T/U.P.G.S.T. Act, 2017. Analysis: The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking the quashing of the impugned order dated 27.11.2021 issued by respondent No.3, alleging a violation of principles of natural justice. The facts revealed that an undated notice was issued under Section 73(1) of the C.G.S.T/U.P.G.S.T. Act, 2017, which was later dated as 20.10.2021 in the impugned order. The petitioner had previously filed Writ Tax No.933 of 2021, where observations were made regarding the need for an independent application of mind by the respondent No.2 and appropriate wording of show cause notices. Despite adjournment applications and communication regarding fixed dates, the petitioner was not granted a reasonable time to respond to the show cause notice, leading to the alleged non-compliance of principles of natural justice. The High Court, after considering the submissions, quashed the impugned order dated 27.11.2021 under Section 73(9) of the C.G.S.T/U.P.G.S.T. Act, 2017, passed by respondent No.3. The matter was remitted back to respondent No.3 to pass a fresh order in accordance with the law, preferably within two months from the date of the court's order. The petitioner was directed to submit a reply within three weeks before respondent No.3, along with a copy of the court's order. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of, providing relief to the petitioner based on the violation of principles of natural justice in the impugned order. In conclusion, the judgment addressed the issue of non-compliance with principles of natural justice in the impugned order dated 27.11.2021 under the C.G.S.T/U.P.G.S.T. Act, 2017. By quashing the order and remitting the matter back for a fresh decision, the High Court upheld the importance of procedural fairness and the right to be heard in legal proceedings, ensuring a just and lawful outcome for the parties involved.
|
