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>Delhi HC sets aside GST demand order under Section 73 for violating natural justice principles</h1> <h3>M/s. Jindal Trading Co. Through its Proprietor Sh. Suresh Jindal Versus Union Of India And Ors.</h3> M/s. Jindal Trading Co. Through its Proprietor Sh. Suresh Jindal Versus Union Of India And Ors. - 2024 (87) G.S.T.L. 462 (Del.) Issues Involved:The issues involved in this case are the validity of the orders dated 24.12.2023 and 28.12.2023 passed under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, regarding the demand created against the petitioner based on Show Cause Notices dated 22.09.2023 and 29.09.2023.Judgment Details:Issue 1: Impugned Order dated 24.12.2023The petitioner challenged the order dated 24.12.2023, contending that they were unable to file a reply to the Show Cause Notice dated 22.09.2023. The Court observed that the Show Cause Notice was vague and unreasoned, lacking specific details and supporting evidence. The Proper Officer created a demand ex-parte without considering the petitioner's reply. The Court held that the order was unsustainable as the petitioner was not given a fair opportunity to respond, and remitted the matter for re-adjudication.Issue 2: Impugned Order dated 28.12.2023The petitioner also challenged the order dated 28.12.2023, arguing that their detailed reply to the Show Cause Notice dated 29.09.2023 was not properly considered. The Court found that the Proper Officer did not adequately assess the petitioner's reply, merely dismissing it as unsupported without proper consideration. The Court noted that the petitioner was not given a chance to provide further details or clarifications. Consequently, the Court set aside the order and remitted the matter for re-adjudication.Conclusion:In conclusion, the High Court held that the impugned orders dated 24.12.2023 and 28.12.2023 were unsustainable and set them aside. The Show Cause Notices were remitted to the Proper Officer for re-adjudication. The petitioner was granted 30 days to file a further reply, and the Proper Officer was directed to re-adjudicate the matter after providing an opportunity for a personal hearing. The Court clarified that it did not comment on the merits of the case, and all rights and contentions of the parties were reserved. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
