Procedural Flaws Invalidate Tax Assessment: Lack of Personal Hearing Leads to Order Quashing and Remand for Reconsideration The HC found the assessment order unsustainable due to procedural irregularities. The respondent failed to provide a personal hearing and consider the ...
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.
Procedural Flaws Invalidate Tax Assessment: Lack of Personal Hearing Leads to Order Quashing and Remand for Reconsideration
The HC found the assessment order unsustainable due to procedural irregularities. The respondent failed to provide a personal hearing and consider the petitioner's adjournment request. The court quashed the order, remanded the matter for reconsideration, and directed the respondent to grant a reasonable opportunity for hearing and reply within two months. The petition was disposed of without costs.
Issues involved: Challenge to assessment order imposing liability on petitioner for wrong availment of transitional Input Tax Credit.
Summary: The petitioner, a partnership firm, had carried forward Input Tax Credit from the erstwhile value added tax regime to the GST regime. An intimation was issued to the petitioner in August 2022, followed by a show cause notice in September 2023. The petitioner requested an extension of time due to the death of a partner's mother, but the impugned order was issued on 29.12.2023 without considering the request for adjournment or providing a personal hearing as required by Section 75 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
The petitioner's counsel argued that the request for adjournment was not responded to, and a personal hearing was not provided, as mandated by law. On the other hand, the Government Advocate pointed out that the petitioner had sufficient time to respond, as the intimation was issued in August 2022.
The Court found that the impugned order was unsustainable because the respondent did not consider the petitioner's request for adjournment and failed to provide a personal hearing despite offering one under a reminder dated 16.12.2023. Consequently, the Court quashed the order and remanded the matter for re-consideration. The petitioner was granted fifteen days to submit a reply to the show cause notice, and the respondent was directed to provide a reasonable opportunity, including a personal hearing, before issuing a fresh order within two months.
In conclusion, the petition was disposed of with no costs, and the related motions were closed as per the above terms.
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 
