Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Decolene Fibers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner DGST And Ors. (Delhi High Court)
Appeal Number : W.P.(C) 5429/2024
Date of Judgement/Order : 16/04/2024
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Decolene Fibers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Commissioner DGST And Ors. (Delhi High Court)

The case of Decolene Fibers Pvt. Ltd. vs Commissioner DGST revolves around an order passed under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner contests an order dated 30.12.2023, which disposed of a Show Cause Notice (SCN) proposing a substantial demand against the petitioner. Despite filing a detailed reply, the petitioner argues that their response was not adequately considered, leading to a cryptic and unsatisfactory order.

The petitioner highlights that they had submitted a comprehensive reply on 17.10.2023 addressing each aspect outlined in the SCN. However, the impugned order fails to acknowledge or assess the merits of this response. Instead, it dismisses the petitioner’s submission as unsatisfactory without providing any substantive reasoning or addressing the specific contentions raised. This raises serious questions regarding the propriety and fairness of the adjudication process.

Furthermore, the court observes that the assessing officer did not demonstrate due diligence in evaluating the petitioner’s reply. There is a glaring absence of any indication that the officer considered the submitted documents or engaged in a meaningful review of the petitioner’s contentions. Such cursory assessment undermines the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness, which are integral to the adjudicatory process.

The court emphasizes that the assessing officer’s duty extends beyond a perfunctory examination of the taxpayer’s submissions. Even if the officer deemed additional information necessary, it was incumbent upon them to seek clarification from the petitioner. Failure to afford the petitioner an opportunity to supplement their response or address any perceived deficiencies violates the fundamental principles of audi alteram partem – the right to be heard.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
August 2024
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031