Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
+ Post an Article
Post a New Article
Title :
0/200 char
Description :
Max 0 char
Category :
Co Author :

In case of Co-Author, You may provide Username as per TMI records

Delete Reply

Are you sure you want to delete your reply beginning with '' ?

Delete Issue

Are you sure you want to delete your Issue titled: '' ?

Articles

Back

All Articles

Advanced Search
Reset Filters
Search By:
Search by Text :
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms
Select Date:
FromTo
Category :
Sort By:
Relevance Date

Order liable to be set aside when no reasonable opportunity to submit reply is provided to Assessee after issuance of SCN

Bimal jain
Order Quashed: Company Denied Fair Chance to Respond to SCN on Input Tax Credit Blocking Under GST Rules The Madras High Court quashed an order against a company due to a lack of reasonable opportunity to respond to a Show Cause Notice (SCN). The SCN, related to blocking Input Tax Credit under GST rules, was emailed to the company on the same day as the scheduled personal hearing. The court held that the company was not given adequate time to submit necessary documents or explanations, thus allowing the writ petition. The court directed the authorities to provide a fair opportunity for the company to present its case, including a personal hearing. (AI Summary)

The Hon’ble Madras High Court in BRAKES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR - FINANCE & CFO MR. G. SHANKAR VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) , CHENNAI - 2024 (1) TMI 661 - MADRAS HIGH COURT  allowed the writ petition, thereby setting aside the Impugned Order in case where no reasonable opportunity is provided to the Assessee to submit reply after issuance of Show Cause Notice (“SCN”) as the SCN is received via Email on the same day of the personal hearing.

Facts:

Revenue Department (“the Respondent”) issued a notice dated February 14, 2023, to Brakes India (P) Ltd. (“the Petitioner”) for proposing to block Input Tax Credit (“ITC”) under Rule 86A of the Central Goods and Services Rules, 2017(“the CGST Rules”) pertaining to the purchases from the supplier claimed to be non-existent for which reply was filed by the Petitioner. Thereafter, the Petitioner was issued a Show Cause Notice dated October 9, 2023 which was received by the Petitioner via Email dated October 25, 2023. Subsequently, the Order dated October 30, 2023 (“the Impugned Order”) was issued against the Petitioner wherein the Petitioner was directed by the Respondent to reverse the ITC.

Aggrieved by the Impugned Order, the Petitioner filed a writ petition before the Hon’ble High Court contending that, as per the SCN issued, the date fixed for personal hearing was the same date on which SCN was received by the Petitioner via Email.

Issue:

Whether Impugned Order is liable to be set aside when the SCN is received via Email on the same day of the personal hearing?

Held:

The Hon’ble Madras High Court in BRAKES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR - FINANCE & CFO MR. G. SHANKAR VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) , CHENNAI - 2024 (1) TMI 661 - MADRAS HIGH COURT  held as under:

  • Opined that, as per the facts of the case, no reasonable opportunity was provided to the Petitioner to submit the necessary documents and provide necessary explanation to the Respondent
  • Further Opined that, without expressing any opinion on the merits in the present matter, the Impugned Order requires interference.
  • Held that, the Impugned Order is quashed, Hence, writ petition is allowed.
  • Directed that, the Respondent Authorities should provide reasonable opportunity to the Petitioner, including a personal hearing and dispose the matter accordingly.

(Author can be reached at [email protected])

answers
Sort by
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Recent Articles