Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the impugned order was vitiated for violation of principles of natural justice on the ground that copies of relied upon documents were not supplied, and whether the petitioner was entitled to invoke writ jurisdiction to challenge the demand of ineligible CENVAT credit.
Analysis: The only substantial grievance was non-supply of documents. The record showed that most of the required documents had already been handed over with acknowledgment, and the disputed invoices were identified in the annexure with invoice numbers and supplier details. The petitioner was therefore not prevented from verifying the transactions from its suppliers. In these circumstances, the grievance of non-supply was held to be unfounded and no breach of natural justice was established. As the challenge rested solely on that ground, the petitioner was not entitled to invoke Article 226 of the Constitution of India to assail the order.
Conclusion: The challenge based on alleged non-supply of relied upon documents failed, and the writ petition was dismissed.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the material relied upon by the authority has substantially been furnished, and the disputed documents can be identified and verified from the particulars supplied, a plea of violation of natural justice for non-supply of documents is not established so as to warrant interference in writ jurisdiction.