The petitioner contested a demand raised against them u/s 74 of ...

Case Laws GST

March 18, 2024

The petitioner contested a demand raised against them u/s 74 of the GST Act for a substantial amount, claiming that the order was passed without affording them an opportunity of personal hearing, thus violating their rights under the principles of natural justice. - The High Court referred to previous judgments, including one stating that under Section 75(4) of the GST Act, it is mandatory to grant a personal hearing where any adverse decision is contemplated against the person chargeable with tax or penalty, even without a specific request for such hearing. The Court held that the authority must afford an opportunity of personal hearing before passing any adverse order, as clarified in previous judgments.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The petitioner contested a demand raised against them u/s 74 of ...

Case Laws GST

March 18, 2024

You may also like:

Interest liability - delay in furnishing GSTR-3B return - Liability imposed without any adjudication proceeding u/s 73 or 74 - despite disputing the liability towards...

Reversal of Input Tax Credit - fictitious suppliers/firms - fake invoices - demand to remit the amount availed as input tax credit at the stage of summons itself without...

Notice/summons issued by the Central Tax Authority whereas adjudication u/s 74 had been made by the State Authority - the initiation of the proceeding for imposition of...

The High Court addressed a challenge to assessment orders where the petitioner lacked a reasonable opportunity to contest tax demands due to discrepancies in returns....

Refund of the amounts paid during investigation - remittances made by the petitioner during investigation - self- ascertainment - Section 74(5) of GST Act - statement...

The High Court set aside the impugned tax demand order due to violation of principles of natural justice, as the petitioner was not provided a reasonable opportunity to...

Show Cause Notice u/s 74 of CGST Act lacks jurisdiction as it fails to establish fraud, willful misstatement or suppression of facts by petitioner in availing Input Tax...

Expiry of warehousing period - amount realized through auction could not meet the dues of the Government, demand raised for recovery of balance demand - demand confirmed - HC

Levy of Service Tax - leasing of the land of Kandla Port Trust - The show cause notice was issued only for demand of interest and penalty and there is no demand of...

Validity of Show cause notice issued u/s 74 - Erroneous Refund - Section 74(1) of the OGST Act does not appear to make any distinction between those refund orders that...

Demand in respect of firm raised in the name of Partner - In the light of the legal nature of a partnership firm, a demand raised on the managing partner can never be...

Seeking to allow petitioner to adjust the credit amount which was blocked - Demand u/s 74(5) - in the notice dated 01.11.2021, it is wrongly mentioned as Form GST...

Validity of SCN - vague SCN issued u/s 74 - The High court noted that the issuance of a show-cause notice u/s 74 requires specific conditions, such as 'fraud' or 'wilful...

Demand and Recovery u/s 74 - Cross state adjustment of unutilized input tax credit - input service distributor (ISD) - It is pertinent to notice that in view of...

The High Court set aside an assessment order due to lack of reasonable opportunity for the petitioner to contest the tax demand on merits. The show cause notice and...

Quick Updates: