9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (10) TMI 312 - HC - GSTMaintainability of petition - availability of alternative remedy - calling for records - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - It is on the basis of an inspection of the web portals that certain observations came to be made. The petitioner does not dispute that the aforesaid URLs are owned by it. It is also not the case of the petitioner that it was not confronted with the material so gathered. Since that material was, in any case, in the public domain, there are no merit in the submission that the principles of natural justice were violated. Petition dismissed.
Issues involved: Violation of principles of natural justice in passing the impugned order u/s 61 of CGST Act and Rule 99 of CGST Rules.
The writ petition sought to quash a notice dated 25/4/22 u/s 61 of CGST Act read with Rule 99 of CGST Rules in Form ASMT-10 for FY 2017-18 & 2018-19 and the impugned order dated 31/05/2023 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Central Tax, GST, Division Wazirpur, Delhi, along with subsequent proceedings. The petitioner contended that the impugned order violated the principles of natural justice by considering material not included with the return or provided by the petitioner. The court noted that the material in question was gathered from specific URLs owned by the petitioner, and the petitioner was aware of this material. Consequently, the court found no merit in the argument that the principles of natural justice were violated. The petitioner had an alternative statutory remedy against the impugned order. The petitioner's counsel argued that the order was passed in violation of natural justice, citing Para 19.3 of the impugned order. However, the court observed that the details in Para 19.3 were obtained from URLs owned by the petitioner, which were in the public domain. The court concluded that there was no violation of natural justice. As a result, the writ petition was dismissed, but the petitioner was not precluded from pursuing alternative remedies. All rights and contentions of the parties were kept open for further proceedings.
|
