2025 (4) TMI 1718

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... counsel for the parties. Writ Tax No. 1462 of 2024 is taken as a leading case for deciding the controversy involved in these writ petitions. Writ Tax No. 1462 of 2024: 3. The instant writ petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 12.06.2024 passed by the respondent no. 1 as well as the impugned order dated 18.11.2020 passed by the respondent no. 2. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and engaged in the business of providing management consultancy services. He further submits that on 05.11.2020, a show cause notice was issued in Form DRC - 01 under section 74 of the GST Act for non-compliance in filing Form GSTR - 3B. Ther....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... In support of his submission, he has placed reliance on the judgement of this Court in Mahendra Educational (P) Limited Vs. State of U.P. [(2024) 160 Taxmann.com 443 (Allahabad)]. 6. Per contra, learned ACSC supports the impugned orders. 7. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the Court has perused the record. 8. It is not in dispute that the notice was issued on 05.11.2020, but the record shows that in the column with regard to date of personal hearing, time of personal hearing and venue of personal hearing, "N.A." was mentioned. This Court in Bharat Mint & Allied Chemicals Vs. Commissioner Commercial Tax & 2 Ors., (2022) 48 VLJ 325, has held that the Assessing Authority was bound to afford opportunity of personal heari....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or penalty, or where any adverse decision is contemplated against such person." 6. We find ourselves in complete agreement with the view taken by the coordinate bench in Bharat Mint & Allied Chemicals (supra). Once it has been laid down by way of a principle of law that a person/assessee is not required to request for "opportunity of personal hearing" and it remained mandatory upon the Assessing Authority to afford such opportunity before passing an adverse order, the fact that the petitioner may have signified 'No' in the column meant to mark the assessee's choice to avail personal hearing, would bear no legal consequence. 7. Even otherwise in the context of an assessment order creating heavy civil liability, ....