Case Law Details
Mittal Plywood And Furniture Vs State of U.P. (Allahabad High Court)
From the record, it appears that the first notice was given by the respondent no.2 to the petitioner on 15.03.2022 granting 15 days’ time to submit reply with respect to the allegedly unverified transaction of Rs.3,19,22,729/-. On 30.03.2022, the petitioner submitted online adjournment application seeking 15 days’ time. Undisputedly, that application was the first adjournment application of the petitioner. The cause shown for taking adjournment was not disbelieved by the respondent no.2 and, yet, the adjournment application has been rejected and liability to tax has been assessed in the impugned orders.
From the facts as noted above, it is evident that the impugned orders have been passed by the respondent no.2 in gross breach of principles of natural justice.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
