9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 1395X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION VERSUS REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS, MUMBAI ORS. [ 1998 (10) TMI 510 - SUPREME COURT] . Conclusion - The impugned order is required to be quashed and set aside only on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice by not providing opportunity of hearing as contemplated in Section 75 (4) of the CGST Act, more particularly, when the petitioner has prayed for such opportunity of hearing in the reply. Petition disposed off by way of remand. - HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA AND HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.RAY Appearance: For the Petitioner(s) No. 1: Mr Varis V Isani (3858). For the Respondent(s) No. 1: Mr Raj Tanna, AGP. For the Respondent(s) No. 1,2: DS Aff. Not Filed (N). ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndent Adjudicating Authority and impugned order was passed without taking into the consideration the documents filed by the petitioner along with the reply tendering the explanation. 5. It was further submitted by the learned advocate for the petitioner that the petitioner is aware about the alternative remedy available under Section 107 of the GST Act. However, the same is not an efficacious remedy in view of the fact that the respondent Assessing Officer has not dealt with the submissions of the petitioner and no chance of proper hearing has been given to the petitioner which is in the breach of principles of natural justice. Learned advocate has relied upon the decision of the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Whirlpool Corporation Vs. R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons however are in contradiction to Para-19 of the reply dated 22.11.2021 filed by the petitioner to the show cause notice, which reads as under :- 19. We may be heard in person before the case is decided. 10. Thus, it is evident that the respondent Adjudicating Authority has failed to provide any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner though he has prayed in the written submissions. 11. In such circumstances, there is a breach of the principles of natural justice as held by the Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Whirlpool Corporation (supra). 12. In view of the foregoing reasons, we are of the opinion that the impugned order is required to be quashed and set aside only on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice by not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
