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>Procedural Flaw in GST Assessment Invalidates Order, Ensures Petitioner's Right to Personal Hearing Under Section 75(4)</h1> <h3>M/s. Nasibulla Timber Store Versus State of U.P. and Another</h3> M/s. Nasibulla Timber Store Versus State of U.P. and Another - TMI Issues:Opportunity of personal hearing under section 75(4) of the U.P. G.S.T. Act, 2017 not granted to the petitioner.Analysis:The judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Court focused on the issue of the petitioner not being afforded the opportunity of personal hearing as mandated under section 75(4) of the U.P. G.S.T. Act, 2017. The Court noted that the notice issued to the petitioner did not propose to grant personal hearing, as indicated by the abbreviation 'NA' against the relevant columns. It was observed that the petitioner was only called to file a written reply, and the lack of personal hearing opportunity could have led to the closure of the chance to submit a written reply. However, the Court emphasized that even in such a situation, the petitioner should have the right to participate in an oral hearing to contest adverse conclusions.Furthermore, the judgment highlighted the importance of adhering to the principles of natural justice ingrained in the statute, which require both written reply submission and oral hearing to be independently satisfied. The Court emphasized that failure to avail one opportunity should not result in the denial of the other. The petitioner's counsel argued that a detailed reply was not necessary, and any discrepancies in the returns could have been clarified if a personal hearing opportunity had been granted.In conclusion, the Court found that the impugned order had been passed contrary to the mandatory procedure, leading to a deficiency in the proceedings' outcome. As a result, the Court set aside the impugned order dated 30.06.2023 and remitted the matter to the respondent to pass a fresh order. The petitioner was directed to file a final reply to the show cause notice within two weeks and appear before the assessing authority on a specified date for further proceedings. The writ petition was allowed in favor of the petitioner, emphasizing the critical importance of providing a fair opportunity for personal hearing in such cases.
TaxTMI 