D. Prasanna Vs Assistant Commissioner (Madras High Court)
In the case of D. Prasanna vs. Assistant Commissioner before the Madras High Court, the petitioner challenged a recovery order issued by the GST department, claiming it was passed without a proper opportunity for a personal hearing, thereby violating natural justice principles. However, the court noted that the petitioner had been given two prior chances for a personal hearing, both of which were missed. On 15.03.2023 and again on 20.04.2023, the petitioner failed to appear despite being granted ample time to file a reply. The petitioner then requested an additional 8 weeks to submit a response but did not comply, leading to the issuance of the impugned order on 29.08.2023.
The court concluded that the GST department was not at fault for proceeding with the order, as the petitioner had repeatedly missed deadlines and failed to take advantage of the opportunities provided. Given that an alternative remedy of appeal was available, the court dismissed the writ petition but granted the petitioner an additional 30 days to file an appeal with the appropriate authority. The court also instructed the authorities to accept the appeal without considering the limitation period if the appeal was otherwise in order.
