Common portal notice after GST registration cancellation was insufficient; physical service and hearing were required before adjudication could procee...
An efficacious statutory appeal ordinarily bars recourse to Article 226, and the natural justice exception applies only where denial of hearing is shown on the facts. The Court found that the petitioner had been served with the show cause notice, given time to reply, and granted further extension, but filed no reply or material showing denial of hearing; the writ challenge was therefore not maintainable. It also held that completion of audit under Section 65 does not divest the proper officer of jurisdiction to initiate proceedings under Section 73, because the statutory scheme contemplates such action where audit reveals tax liability or irregular input tax credit. The writ petition was dismissed, with liberty to pursue the appellate remedy.
An efficacious statutory appeal ordinarily bars recourse to Article 226, and the natural justice exception applies only where denial of hearing is shown on the facts. The Court found that the petitioner had been served with the show cause notice, given time to reply, and granted further extension, but filed no reply or material showing denial of hearing; the writ challenge was therefore not maintainable. It also held that completion of audit under Section 65 does not divest the proper officer of jurisdiction to initiate proceedings under Section 73, because the statutory scheme contemplates such action where audit reveals tax liability or irregular input tax credit. The writ petition was dismissed, with liberty to pursue the appellate remedy.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
