TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
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 sets aside order, mandates personal hearing, directs respondent to redo process. Writ petition allowed.</h1> <h3>M/s. Shri Rohith Spinners (Pvt) Ltd Versus Assistant Commissioner (ST) (Fac) Office of the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Tiruchengode.</h3> M/s. Shri Rohith Spinners (Pvt) Ltd Versus Assistant Commissioner (ST) (Fac) Office of the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Tiruchengode. - TMI Issues:Migration from TNVAT to TN Goods ST Act, Natural Justice Principles (NJP) violation in the impugned order, Show Cause Notice (SCN) vagueness, absence of personal hearing (PH) before the impugned order, consideration of writ petitioner's objections, statutory requirement of PH under Section 75(4) of TN Goods ST Act.Migration from TNVAT to TN Goods ST Act:The writ petitioner migrated from TNVAT to TN Goods ST Act, with Input Tax Credit (ITC) and Tran-1 being crucial aspects. The focus shifted to the Natural Justice Principles (NJP) as a statutory requirement embedded in the TN Goods ST Act, influencing the entire writ petition.Violation of Natural Justice Principles (NJP) in the Impugned Order:The writ petitioner argued that the Show Cause Notice (SCN) preceding the impugned order was vague, leading to a lack of opportunity to respond adequately. Additionally, the absence of a personal hearing (PH) before the adverse impugned order violated the statutory imperative of NJP, as outlined in Section 75(4) of the TN Goods ST Act.Consideration of Writ Petitioner's Objections:The writ petitioner raised concerns post the impugned order, highlighting various points on merits in a communication to the respondent. The Revenue counsel acknowledged the objections but clarified that no personal hearing was recorded, although the objections were considered before the impugned order.Statutory Requirement of Personal Hearing (PH) under Section 75(4) of TN Goods ST Act:The Court emphasized the statutory importance of granting a personal hearing under Section 75(4) of the TN Goods ST Act, especially when an adverse decision is made against the taxpayer. The absence of a personal hearing led to the dislodgement of the impugned order, setting it aside solely on the grounds of non-compliance with the statutory requirement of PH.Directive and Disposition:The Court ordered the impugned order to be set aside due to the lack of a personal hearing, directing the respondent to redo the entire exercise de novo within twelve weeks. The respondent was permitted to issue an additional Show Cause Notice (SCN) and consider the writ petitioner's post-order objections in the fresh decision-making process. The writ petition was allowed, and the connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions were disposed of without costs.
TaxTMI 