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

TMI Blog

Home

2023 (9) TMI 3

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... etitioner having not been heard the petition is required to be allowed on that score alone. The petitioner has challenged the order of the respondent No. 2, impugned in the present petition, on various other grounds, which also relate to the competency of the said respondent to invoke the revisional powers under the GST Act and the period within which it could be exercised qua the proceedings which came to be initiated against the petitioner - the Court is of the view that as these grounds are required to be decided qua the other facts that have emerged in the proceedings it is in the fitness of things that the petitioner should take all these pleas which he has taken in the present petition and also urged before the court to take the sa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t vide his order dated 17th May, 2001. The order was challenged before the appellate authority. The appellate authority vide order dated 23.02.2004 set aside the assessment order along with the order of imposition of interest and penalty and further remanded the case back to the Assessing Authority for de novo assessment and to conduct a detailed enquiry covering all aspects. On remand the re-assessment proceedings were initiated and the re-assessment proceedings were completed in terms of Section 7 (15) of J K GST Act, 1962. The petitioner was held entitled to exemptions as per SRO 246 of 1998 dated 20.08.1998. The respondent No. 4, the Assessing Authority, had passed the order after obtaining technical opinion for detailed analysis from G .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... - set aside the order dated 29th March, 2006 of Assessing Authority and again directed the Assessing Authority to frame a fresh order strictly in accordance with the mandate given to him by the appellate authority. The order impugned has been challenged on grounds amongst other that the order has not passed in consonance with the principle of natural justice as the petitioner was not heard before passing of the impugned order by the respondent No. 2, that the impugned order could not be passed as the revisional powers could not be invoked by the respondent No. 2 after coming into operation of the VAT Act on 1st April, 2005 and further that the said respondent was inimical towards the petitioner. The Assessing Authority had on remand taken c .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... titioner before passing the impugned order. The respondent No. 2 could not have initiated the proceedings against the petitioner after the Assessing Authority had on remand passed the re-assessment order on the grounds as mentioned in the earlier paras. 10. Mr. K. D. S. Kotwal, learned Deputy Advocate General has argued that the order has been passed by the respondent No. 2 after complying with all the formalities and the petitioner was given opportunity to file the reply to the notice and the opportunity was seized by the petitioner by filing the reply to the notice issued by the respondent No. 2. The plea of natural justice having being violated by the respondent No. 2 before passing the impugned order is without any substance is the p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 970 AIR SC 1520 titled Sirpur Paper Mills Ltd. V. Commissioner of wealth Tax the Hon ble Apex Court held while dealing with powers of Commissioner under Wealth Tax Act underlined the requirement to decide the matter while keeping in view the principles of natural justice as the power of the Commissioner is quasi-judicial under Section 25 of the Act. 13. The court being satisfied that the impugned order has been passed by the respondent in violation of the principle of natural justice, the petitioner having not been heard the petition is required to be allowed on that score alone. 14. The petitioner has challenged the order of the respondent No. 2, impugned in the present petition, on various other grounds, as stated above, which a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates