Case Law Details
Bhavadharani Builders Vs Deputy Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise (Madras High Court)
Madras High Court held that without instructions, without verifying the records, the petitioner cannot direct his representatives to appear. Accordingly, such representation is untenable in law.
Facts- Issue involved here is that the Superintendent have issued notice of personal hearing dated 14.11.2022 and the date of personal hearing was fixed on 25.11.2022. But the petitioner has sought an adjournment vide reply dated 23.11.2022 citing his illness. Thereafter, the second respondent has issued personal hearing Notice dated 23.02.2023 directing the petitioner to appear for the personal hearing fixed on 01.03.2023.
After receipt of the notice, the petitioner has sent adjournment letter dated 27.02.2023 informing that he has been admitted in Hospital as inpatient and he is undergoing treatment for which he has produced the Medical Certificate.
Thereafter, the respondents have issued one more notice dated 10.03.2023, wherein the Superintendent informed that the petitioner should appear for personal hearing on 16.03.2023. Immediately, the petitioner has sent an adjournment letter dated 14.03.2023 seeking “two months time” to file reply to the show cause notice for which the petitioner also enclosed the certificate of the Hospital where he has been diagnosed as having cancer in his right leg. However, the respondents declined to grant adjournment and passed an impugned order dated 20.04.2023.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
