RECTIFICATION OF ERROR.

[Sadanand Bulbule]

Dear experts

The adjudicating authority has passed an order under Section 73 by blatantly discarding the solid merits which has culminated in the fastening of huge tax, interest and penalty. Aggrieved by the impugned order, an application for rectification of error under Section 161 has been filed coupled with documented evidence and binding judicial rulings. The authority has issued an endorsement indicating the date for personal hearing. Shockingly it first says that, though there is no merit/reason to consider such application, personal hearing is given on the grounds of “principles of natural justice”.

Since the authority has mentally decided to reject (mplicitly rejected) such application, is there any scope for natural justice? Having delivered “injustice” before the personal hearing, then what is the significance of PH? What is the recourse for such biased and prejudiced behaviour by the quasi-judicial authority?

AI Summary

Quasi-Judicial Authority Fails Natural Justice Test in GST Order, Raising Serious Procedural Concerns Under Section 73 A quasi-judicial authority issued an order under Section 73 of the GST Act, seemingly disregarding substantive merits. An application for rectification was filed, and a personal hearing was scheduled. However, the authority appeared to have pre-determined the rejection, raising concerns about the principles of natural justice. The forum discusses potential legal recourse, including challenging the order through appellate mechanisms or constitutional remedies due to perceived bias and procedural impropriety.