TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 1532
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mand of Rs. 97,53,080/- along with interest has been confirmed against the Petitioner. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the present petition has been preferred by Mrs. Chakresh Jain who is stated to be a senior citizen of more than 75 years of age and a widow. Mrs. Jain is the sole proprietor of the Petitioner firm who has a dealership agreement dated 14th October, 2016 with M/s. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited in respect of domestic & commercial Liquified Petroleum Gas for a period of 10 years. 4. A notice in Form GST ASMT 10 was issued to the Petitioner firm on 5th April, 2024 (hereinafter "the notice") relating to certain discrepancies in the Goods and Service Tax (hereinafter, 'GST') returns filed by the Petitioner ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....28th December, 2023, which is also pending before the Supreme Court - though, no specific orders seeking quashing of the said notifications has been sought in the present Petition. 10. Heard. The challenge in the present petition is similar to a batch of petitions wherein, inter alia, the impugned notifications were challenged. W.P.(C) No. 16499/2023 titled DJST Traders Private Limited v. Union of India & Ors was the lead matter in the said batch of petitions. On 22nd April, 2025, the parties were heard at length qua the validity of the impugned notifications and accordingly, the following order was passed: "4. Submissions have been heard in part. The broad challenge to both sets of Notifications is on the ground that the proper....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ourt in S.L.P No 4240/2025 titled M/s HCC-SEW-MEIL-AAG JV v. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax &Ors. The Supreme Court vide order dated 21st February, 2025, passed the following order in the said case: "1. The subject matter of challenge before the High Court was to the legality, validity and propriety of the Notification No. 13/2022 dated 5-7-2022 & Notification Nos. 9 and 56 of 2023 dated 31-3-2023 & 8-12-2023 respectively. 2. However, in the present petition, we are concerned with Notification Nos.9 & 56/2023 dated 31-3-2023 respectively. 3. These Notifications have been issued in the purported exercise of power under Section 168 (A) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act. 2017 (for short, the "GST Act"). ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sued in purported exercise of power under Section 168-A of the Act which have been challenged, and we direct that all these present connected cases shall be governed by the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the decision thereto shall be binding on these cases too. 67. Since the matter is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the interim order passed in the present cases, would continue to operate and would be governed by the final adjudication by the Supreme Court on the issues in the aforesaid SLP-4240-2025. 68. In view of the aforesaid, all these connected cases are disposed of accordingly along with pending applications, if any." 8. The Court has heard ld. Counsels for the parties for....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s have been disposed of by this Court on subsequent dates, either remanding the matters or relegating the parties to avail of their appellate remedies, depending upon the factual situation in the respective cases. All such orders are subject to further orders of the Supreme Court in respect of the validity of the Notification No. 56/2023-Central Tax in S.L.P No 4240/2025 titled M/s HCC-SEW-MEIL-AAG JV v. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax & Ors.. 12. Insofar as the present case is concerned, considering the medical condition of the Petitioner firm's proprietor which prevented her from filing a reply to the notices or appearing for the personal hearing, in the opinion of the Court, the matter deserves to be heard on merits. In W.P.(C) 47....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ld the demand raised in SCN/DRC 01. DRC 07 is issued accordingly. 8. This Court is of the opinion that since the Petitioner has not been afforded an opportunity to be heard and the said SCN and the consequent impugned order have been passed without hearing the Petitioner, an opportunity ought to be afforded to the Petitioner to contest the matter on merits. 9. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside. The Petitioner is granted 30 days' time to file the reply to SCN. Upon filing of the reply, the Adjudicating Authority shall issue to the Petitioner, a notice for personal hearing. The personal hearing notice shall personal hearing. The personal hearing notice shall be communicated to the Petitioner on the following mobil....