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>Kerala High Court Orders Swift Adjudication in CGST Rules Case</h1> <h3>NETHU VARGHESE (PROPRIETRIX) Versus THE ASST. STATE TAX OFFICER, THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (INT), THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE GST</h3> NETHU VARGHESE (PROPRIETRIX) Versus THE ASST. STATE TAX OFFICER, THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (INT), THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE GST - TMI Issues:Quashing of orders of detention under Section 129(1) of CGST Rules, 2017 and notice under Section 129(3) of the CGST act.Analysis:The judgment delivered by the Honorable Mr. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas of the Kerala High Court pertains to a writ petition filed by the petitioners seeking the quashing of Exts.P8 and P9, which are orders of detention under Section 129(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017, along with a notice under Section 129(3) of the CGST act. The petitioners had furnished a bank guarantee pursuant to Ext.P8 and obtained the release of goods; however, the adjudication proceedings following these orders had not been completed. It was highlighted that due to the pendency of the writ petition, the second respondent, in this case, the Government Pleader, had not finalized the adjudication proceedings.Upon hearing the Counsel for the petitioner and the learned senior Government Pleader, the Honorable Judge opined that the pendency of the writ petition should not impede the completion of the adjudication proceedings mandated under Section 129 of the CGST act. Consequently, a directive was issued to the second respondent to conclude the adjudication proceedings in connection with Ext.P8 promptly, ensuring the finalization of all proceedings within ten days from the receipt of the judgment, if not already completed. Additionally, it was mandated that before finalizing the proceedings as instructed, the petitioner must be given an opportunity to be heard either in person or through a representative.In conclusion, the writ petition was disposed of with the direction for the expeditious completion of the adjudication proceedings as per the provisions of the CGST act, emphasizing the importance of affording the petitioner a fair hearing before finalizing the said proceedings.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
