TaxTMI Login
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Just a moment...
AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) ✕ Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether an assessment order passed under Section 74 of the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 could be sustained when the assessee had expressly requested a personal hearing but none was granted. (ii) Whether the recovery notice founded on such assessment order could survive.
Issue (i): Whether an assessment order passed under Section 74 of the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 could be sustained when the assessee had expressly requested a personal hearing but none was granted.
Analysis: Section 75(4) of the Maharashtra Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 mandates that an opportunity of hearing shall be granted where a written request is made by the person chargeable with tax or penalty, or where an adverse decision is contemplated. The assessee had specifically sought a personal hearing in its reply to the show cause notice. The absence of hearing was not cured by mere consideration of the written reply, because the statutory hearing requirement is independent and mandatory. The impugned order was therefore made in breach of the statutory safeguard and could not be sustained.
Conclusion: The assessment order was rightly quashed and set aside in favour of the assessee.
Issue (ii): Whether the recovery notice founded on such assessment order could survive.
Analysis: The recovery notice was consequential to the assessment order. Once the foundation order was held unsustainable and set aside, the recovery notice based upon it could not independently survive.
Conclusion: The recovery notice was also quashed and set aside in favour of the assessee.
Final Conclusion: The matter was remitted for a fresh assessment after granting the assessee an opportunity of hearing, and the entire adverse action based on the impugned order was set aside.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the statute mandates a personal hearing on a written request or before an adverse decision, an order passed without granting such hearing is unsustainable, and any consequential recovery action founded on it must also fall.
TaxTMI 
