9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 227X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d on 19.02.2020 of the receipt of such refund applications. As rightly pointed out by the petitioners, the only ground assigned for proposing the rejection of the claim for refund is the others with a remark that error in adjusted total turnover. It is surely and rightly has been termed as a show cause notice which is completely vague and lacks the fundamental details which otherwise is required to be given for anyone to comprehend the same. A notice since is a foundation of any proceedings and if the same is not clear and is vague, the very edifice is extremely weak and based on such hollow foundation, when an attempt is made to raise a superstructure, the same cannot be sustained. Not only the show cause notice lacks the clarity ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India calling for the records in the present case, and after going into the question of legality, quash and set aside the impugned notices and impugned orders issued to the petitioner no.1; (b) That this Hon ble Court be pleased to issue writ of mandamus or any other writ or order or direction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India directing the respondent to dispose of and sanction its refund claims dated 03.02.2020 in accordance with law; (c) For costs of the petition be provided for; AND (d) for such further and other reliefs, as this Hon ble Court may deem fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notices did not specify the reasons for proposing to reject the refund application, for they themselves being unclear and vague, no opportunity was made available to the petitioner no.1. The petitioner had replied to the same on 13.03.2020 and various contentions had been raised. 3.4. Once the orders of rejection came on 23.03.2020, without availing any opportunity of personal hearing, no reasons were assigned according to the petitioner in the impugned order for rejection, therefore the petitioner is before this Court with the above mentioned prayers. 4. On issuance of notice, respondent has appeared and filed the affidavit-in-reply through Mr. R.S.Tiwari, Joint Commissioner (In-situ), Division-IV, CGST and Central Excise, Surat, wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... c injury and the vindication of public justice requires to take recourse of Article 226, the writ petition can be entertained. 4.3. The grievance is made that the petitioner, instead of filing an appeal before the Joint Commissioner, had approached the Court straight. He has denied of there being absence of the reasons. It is further his say that it is prematured to claim that the refund is being rejected in as much as speaking order has been passed in this regard and it is provided on the on-line portal. The petitioner also had been availed the opportunity to put up the defence for such a refund claim and the opportunity of personal hearing also had been granted which he chose not to avail. 5. The rejoinder affidavit is filed by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted total turnover. It is surely and rightly has been termed as a show cause notice which is completely vague and lacks the fundamental details which otherwise is required to be given for anyone to comprehend the same. A notice since is a foundation of any proceedings and if the same is not clear and is vague, the very edifice is extremely weak and based on such hollow foundation, when an attempt is made to raise a superstructure, the same cannot be sustained. 7.3. In the affidavit-in-reply filed by the senior officer, he was unable to defend the show cause notice which is not capable of any kind of defence. Availing of any opportunity in terms of filing of the reply or of personal hearing also would not serve any purpose when the very ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3.2020 simply says I hereby reject the amount of INR 0 to M/s. ARCELORMITTAL NIPPON STEEL INDIA LIMITED having GSTIN 24AAACE1741P1ZN under sub-section () of section ) of the Act/under section of the Act. The remark column says Value of steel supply not included in the total adjusted turnover. 7.6. Not only the show cause notice lacks the clarity and requisite material necessary to meet with the same, the order impugned is also in clear violation of the settled cannon of law. Lack of reasons in the show cause notices has not enabled the parties to make an effective representation and file the reply nor would the grant of personal hearing for contesting such show cause notices would sub-serve the purpose. The order of rejection also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
