Tax Authorities Violated Procedural Fairness by Denying Hearing, Invalidating Rs. 5.25 Lakh GST Assessment Under Section 75 HC found a violation of natural justice in a GST tax assessment. The court identified procedural irregularities where tax authorities passed an order ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Tax Authorities Violated Procedural Fairness by Denying Hearing, Invalidating Rs. 5.25 Lakh GST Assessment Under Section 75
HC found a violation of natural justice in a GST tax assessment. The court identified procedural irregularities where tax authorities passed an order imposing Rs. 5,25,806 liability without providing the petitioner a personal hearing as mandated under Section 75 of GST Act. HC directed no coercive action against the petitioner and highlighted the need for proper procedural compliance in tax proceedings.
Issues involved: Violation of principles of natural justice, denial of opportunity of personal hearing, alleged anomalies in tax returns, validity of impugned order under Section 73 of the GST Act, 2017.
Violation of principles of natural justice and denial of opportunity of personal hearing: The petitioner, an assessee under the Assam Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, was served with a Summary of Show Cause Notice alleging anomalies in returns. Despite submitting a detailed reply requesting a personal hearing as per Section 75 of the GST Act, the impugned Order under Section 73 was passed without affording the petitioner the opportunity of personal hearing. The Court noted the absence of recording reasons in the impugned Order and deemed the denial of personal hearing a violation of the provisions of the GST Act, 2017.
Validity of impugned order under Section 73: The impugned Order dated 10.12.2023 imposed a liability of Rs. 5,25,806/- on the petitioner for alleged anomalies in tax returns. The petitioner had made specific requests for extension of time and a personal hearing, which were not considered before passing the order. The Court observed that the petitioner had made out a prima facie case for interim relief, as per the provisions of sub-section [4] of Section 75 of the GST Act, 2017. Consequently, the Court directed that no coercive action should be taken by the respondent authorities against the petitioner until the next date of listing.
Separate Judgment: None.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
