Case Law Details
Johnson Bevisedmond Vs Joint Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (Madras High Court)
Introduction: The Madras High Court recently issued a stay on GST recovery proceedings in the case of Johnson Bevisedmond vs Joint Commissioner of GST & Central Excise. This decision came in response to alleged violations of principles of natural justice, specifically concerning the petitioner’s failure to appear for personal hearings due to the late receipt of notices.
Detailed Analysis: The petitioner, Johnson Bevisedmond, challenged the order dated 29.03.2023, passed by the 1st respondent, and the subsequent recovery letter dated 14.09.2023 from the 2nd respondent. The petitioner argued that despite being entitled to three opportunities for personal hearings, he was only provided with two. Additionally, the notices were received belatedly due to a change in residence from Chennai to Trichy, coupled with the petitioner’s involvement in conducting examinations.
The petitioner urged the court to set aside the impugned order or allow him to file an appeal without the constraints of limitation. The respondent’s counsel, acknowledging the petitioner’s intent to file an appeal, proposed that the court grant liberty for the petitioner to approach the Appellate Authority.
After hearing arguments from both parties and examining the available materials, the Madras High Court granted the petitioner the liberty to file an appeal within 30 days. The Appellate Authority is instructed to entertain the appeal without insisting on the issue of limitation and make decisions in accordance with the law.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
