TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Regarding ensuring proper compliance of the judgment delivered by the Hon’ble High Court in case of Writ Tax No. 1029/2021
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....;। विषय-रिट टैक्स सं0-1029/2021 भारत मिन्ट एण्ड एलाइड कैमिकल्स बनाम कमिश्नर वाणिज्य कर एण्ड अदर्स में मा० उच्च न्यायालय इलाहाबाद द्वारा दिये गये निर्णय का सम्यक अनुपालन कराये जाने के सम्बन्ध में। कृपया रजिस्ट्र....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Court to the Commissioner, Commercial Tax U.P. Lucknow who shall ensure that principles of natural justice as contemplated under Section 75(4) of the CGST/UPGST Act 2017 be followed by Proper Officer/Assessing Authorities in the State of Uttar Pradesh." प्रश्नगत प्रकरण में यू०पी0जी0एस0टी0 अधिनियम की धारा-75(4)के अन्तर्गत अनिवार्य व्यक्तिगत सुनवाई का अवसर व्यापारी को न देने के कारण, तथा प्राकृतिक न्याय के विपरीत होन....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....स्त अधिकारियों को निर्देश दिये जाते है कि मा० न्यायालय के उक्त आदेश के अनुसार उ०प्र०माल और सेवाकर अधिनियम की धारा-75(4) के प्राविधानों का कड़ाई से पालन किया जाय तथा प्राकृतिक न्याय के सिद्धान्त को अनिवार्यत....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d 11.03.2022 from the Registrar (Compliance), High Court, Allahabad in Writ Tax No. 1029/2021 Bharat Mint & Allied Chemicals Vs Commissioner Commercial Tax & Others, all officers are hereby directed to strictly comply with the provisions of Section 75(4) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act in accordance with the aforesaid order of the Hon'ble Court and mandatorily ensure adherence to the principles of natural justice. Enclosure: As above. (Ministi S.) Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Uttar Pradesh. ============= Document 1 EU46413547471 HIGH COURT * AT ALLAHABAD Fax/E-mail/Speed Post From: Anoop Kumar Rai Registrar (Compliance) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad To: The Commissioner, Commercial Tax, U.P. Lucknow No. : 2075 / RC Dated: March 11, 2022 Subject: WRIT TAX No. - 1029 of 2021 - Bharat Mint And Allied Chemicals Vs. Commissioner Commercial Tax And 2 Others. Sir/Madam, In the above mentioned case, the Hon'ble Court (Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani & Hon'ble Jayant Banerji, J. J.), vide order dated 04.03.2022, has been pleased to direct as follows: 17. For all the reasons aforestated, the im....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... CIVIL MISC. WRIT PETITION (TAX) NO.1029 OF 2021 ORDER ON THE PETITION OF BHARAT MINT AND ALLIED CHEMICALS Petitioner. IN RE: BHARAT MINT & ALLIED CHEMICALS KUDHA NARSHINGHPUR, UJHANI, BUDAUN-243639 THROUGH ITS AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE MR. ABHISHEK SHARMA S/O SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA R/O, H.NO.23B, MAIN ROAD, GRAM BIROTIYA, POST BAMNAUSI, BADUN AADHAR NO.8344 0494 0354. Petitioner. VERSUS 1. COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAX. UTTAR PRADESH GOODS AND SERVICES TAX, LUCKNOW. 2. UNION OF INDIA. MINISTRY OF FINANCE (DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE), CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN NEW DELHI110001. 3. JOINT COMMISSIONER (CORPORATE CIRCLE) COMMERCIAL TAX, BAREILLY. Respondents. Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri Abhinav Mehrotra, Sri Satya Vrata Mehrotra. Counsel for the Respondents : C.S.C., A.S.G.I. BY THE COURT A.F.R. Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 1029 of 2021 Petitioner :- Bharat Mint And Allied Chemicals Respondent : - Commissioner Commercial Tax And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Abhinav Mehrotra,Satya Vrata Mehrotra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,A.S.G.I. Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J. Hon'b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ? (ii) Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case the impugned adjudication order has been passed in breach of principle of natural justice and consequently it deserves to be quashed in exercise of powers conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India ? 6. We have perused the show cause notice dated 09.09.2021 in which it has been mentioned as under: "You may appear before the undersigned for personal hearing either in person or through representative for representing your case on the date, time and venue, if mentioned in the table below." 7. In the table below the aforementioned lines, date, time and venue of personal hearing has not-been mentioned. Section 75(4) of the Act, 2017 1 2 provides that opportunity of personal hearing shall be granted where a request is received in writing from the person chargeable with tax or penalty or where any adverse decision is contemplated against such person. 8. Section 75(4) of the Act, 2017 reads as under: "An opportunity of hearing shall be granted where a request is received in writing from the person chargeable with tax or penalty, or where any adverse decision is contemplated against such p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Act to the authorities to afford opportunity of hearing to the assessee i.e. to follow principles of natural justice, has been completely violated by the respondents while passing the impugned order. 13. The stand taken by the respondents in the counter affidavit that the writ petition is not maintainable as the petitioner has an alternative remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the Act, can also not be accepted inasmuch as it is settled law that availability of alternative remedy is not a complete bar to entertain a writ petition under Section 226 of the Constitution of India. Certain exceptions have been carved out by Hon'ble Supreme Court that a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India may be entertained even there is an alternative remedy. One of the principle in this regard is that if the order impugned has been passed in gross violation of principles of & 4 natural justice. It is admitted case of the respondents that no opportunity of personal hearing, as contemplated under Section 75(4) of the Act, 2017, was afforded to the petitioner before passing the impugned order. 14. During the course of hearing of this writ petition, learned standing....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....case of Himmatlal Harilal Mehta v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1954 SC 403, Collector of Customs v. Ramchand Sobhraj Wadhwani, AIR 1961 SC 1506, Collector Of Customs & Excise ,Cochin & Ors. vs A. S. Bava, AIR 1968 SC 13, Dr. Smt. Kuntesh Gupta vs Management Of Hindu Kanya Mahavidyalaya, L.K. Verma v. HMT Ltd. and anr., (2006) 2 SCC 269, Paras 13 and 20, M.P. State Agro Industries Development Corpn. Ltd. & Anr. vs. Jahan Khan (2007) 10 SCC 88 para 12, Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. v. State of U.P. and others (2007) 8 SCC 338, BCPP Mazdoor Sangh Vs. NTPC (2007) 14 SCC 234 (para 19), Rajasthan State Electricity Board v. Union of India, (2008) 5 SCC 632 (para 3), Mumtaz Post Graduate Degree College Vs. University of Lucknow, 8 6 (2009) 2 SCC 630 (para 22 and 23), Godrej Sara Lee Limited v. Assistant Commissioner (AA), (2009) 14 SCC 338. 14, Union of India v. Mangal Textile Mills (I) (P) Ltd., (2010) 14 SCC 553 (paras 6,7,10 and 12), Union of India v. Tantia Construction (P) Ltd., (2011) 5 SCC 697, Southern Electricity Supply Co. of Orissa Ltd. v. Sri Seetaram Rice Mill, (2012) 2 SCC 108 (paras 79,80,81,82,86,87 and 88), State of M.P. Vs. Sanjay Nagaich (2013) 7 SCC 25 (para 34,....