This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.
GST: HC Quashes One Liner Cryptic Order passed in violation of Section 74
Case Law Details
- Case Name
- Vinayaka Steels Vs State Tax Officer (Madras High Court)
- Appeal Number
- Only available for paid members
- Date of Judgement/Order
- Only available for paid members
- Courts
- All High Courts, Madras High Court
Upgrade to Basic or Premium to download.
Already Upgraded? Log in.
Vinayaka Steels Vs State Tax Officer (Madras High Court)
it was incumbent upon the authority under Section 74 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 to have heard the petitioner in person, prior to passing of the impugned order. That apart, the impugned order rejects the explanation tendered by the petitioner vide reply dated 08.02.2022 by way of a cryptic one liner stating ‘dealer reply was verified and not accepted so far’.
5. The confirmation of proposals in the manner as aforesaid, leaves me in no doubt that the impugned order is liable to be set aside and I do so. Let notice ...
