TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court quashes penalty order under KVAT Act, remits for fresh consideration.</h1> The Court quashed and set aside the penalty order issued under Section 67 of the KVAT Act for the year 2017-2018 due to the lack of a proper hearing ... Violation of principles of natural justice - impugned order passed without granting any further opportunity of hearing to the petitioner - penalty u/s 67 of the KVAT Act - HELD THAT:- The petitioner was not granted an opportunity of hearing in the matter, the impugned order at Ext.P8 is quashed and set aside and the matter is remitted for fresh consideration to the 1st respondent State Tax Officer. The petitioner to appear before the 1st respondent State Tax Officer at 11.00 A.M on 21.07.2021 along with all necessary records and then to abide by the further directions of the 1st respondent State Tax Officer. He shall co-operate the 1st respondent State Tax Officer in disposal of the matter without seeking any adjournments. The learned counsel for the petitioner prays that till disposal of the issue of the penalty the notice at Ext.P10 be stayed. However, the petitioner is free to show cause to the said notice at Ext.P10 by disclosing the fact that the impugned order of penalty at Ext.P8 is quashed and set aside by this Court. This writ petition is disposed of. Issues:1. Challenge to penalty order under Section 67 of KVAT Act for the year 2017-2018 based on lack of natural justice principles.Detailed Analysis:The petitioner challenged the penalty order in Ext.P8 under Section 67 of the KVAT Act for the year 2017-2018, solely on the grounds of not following the principles of natural justice. The petitioner was directed to appear for a hearing on 28.02.2021 pursuant to a notice in Ext.P3, which initially asked for appearance on 10.02.2021. The petitioner's counsel argued that on 28.02.2021, the petitioner arrived at the 1st respondent's office at 11:00 AM, but since it was a Sunday, the office was closed, and no one was present to hear the petitioner. Consequently, the impugned order at Ext.P8 was issued without granting any further opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.The learned Government Pleader defended the impugned order at Ext.P8 on its merits but failed to demonstrate that the petitioner was given a hearing opportunity after 28.02.2021, considering it was a Sunday. Due to the lack of a proper hearing opportunity, the Court quashed and set aside the impugned order at Ext.P8. The matter was remitted for fresh consideration to the 1st respondent State Tax Officer, instructing the petitioner to appear before them at 11:00 AM on 21.07.2021 with all necessary records and comply with the officer's further directions. The petitioner was also directed to cooperate with the State Tax Officer without seeking adjournments during the matter's disposal.Regarding the stay of the notice at Ext.P10 until the penalty issue's resolution, the petitioner's counsel prayed for a stay. However, the petitioner was allowed to respond to the notice at Ext.P10 by revealing that the penalty order at Ext.P8 had been quashed and set aside by the Court. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
