TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
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>GST tax notifications and assessment order challenged for lack of fair hearing; assessment set aside, notifications invalidated, case remanded.</h1> The dominant issue was whether the impugned GST notifications and the consequential assessment order were legally sustainable, particularly in light of ... Validity of N/Ns. 09/2023 & 56/2023 issued by the GST Council and the consequential assessment order dated 30.07.2024 passed by the 1st respondent - Violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- It is clear that though the proceedings initiated by the respondent is valid, the impugned assessment order came to be passed in violation of principles of natural justice. In such view of the matter, this Court feels that it would be appropriate to provide an opportunity to the petitioner to establish his case before the respondent. The impugned Notification Nos.09/2023 dated 31.03.2023 and 56/2023 dated 28.12.2023 stand vitiated and illegal - The impugned order dated 30.07.2024 is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded back to the 1st respondent for fresh consideration. Petition disposed off by way of remand. Issues: (i) Whether Notification Nos. 09/2023 and 56/2023 are legally valid; (ii) Whether initiation of proceedings by applying Section 168A is valid and whether the assessment order dated 30.07.2024 is sustainable; (iii) Whether the affected person (legal heir) is entitled to an opportunity of personal hearing and fresh consideration.Issue (i): Whether Notification Nos. 09/2023 and 56/2023 are legally valid.Analysis: The impugned notifications were examined against the effect they have on limitation periods recognised pursuant to the Supreme Court's remedy under Article 142 and the statutory scheme governing assessment and limitation. The notifications were assessed for whether they diminish limitation previously available, proceed on erroneous assumptions about the scope of the Supreme Court order, extinguish vested rights of action, lack requisite statutory or consultative basis, or are otherwise arbitrary.Conclusion: Notification Nos. 09/2023 and 56/2023 are vitiated and illegal.Issue (ii): Whether initiation of proceedings under Section 168A is valid and whether the assessment order dated 30.07.2024 is sustainable.Analysis: The validity of initiation under Section 168A was considered separately from the validity of the notifications. The initiation of proceedings was held to be valid in light of the extension of time recognized by the Supreme Court's suo motu order. However, the assessment order itself was examined for compliance with procedural fairness and jurisdictional regularity; where procedural infirmity or lack of opportunity to be heard was found, the appropriate remedy was remand for fresh consideration.Conclusion: Initiation of proceedings applying Section 168A is valid; the assessment order dated 30.07.2024 is set aside and remanded for fresh consideration.Issue (iii): Whether the legal heir is entitled to an opportunity of personal hearing and to file objections in response to the show-cause notice.Analysis: The assessment order was evaluated for compliance with principles of natural justice. Where the order was recorded without affording the affected person a proper opportunity to file replies and obtain a personal hearing, the appropriate remedy is to permit the filing of objections and to require issuance of a clear personal hearing notice followed by decision on merits.Conclusion: The legal heir is entitled to file reply/objections within the specified time and to a 14-day clear notice fixing a date for personal hearing; the authority must thereafter decide afresh on merits.Final Conclusion: The cumulative legal effect is that the impugned notifications are quashed as illegal, initiation of proceedings under Section 168A remains valid, and the impugned assessment order is set aside and remitted for fresh adjudication with an express opportunity to present objections and receive a personal hearing.Ratio Decidendi: A notification that effectively diminishes statutorily or judicially recognised limitation periods, extinguishes vested rights of action, proceeds on erroneous assumptions about the effect of a binding Supreme Court remedy, or is issued without required consultative or statutory basis is arbitrary and vitiates the notification; procedural orders passed without affording the affected person an opportunity of hearing must be set aside and remitted for fresh consideration.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
