Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : R.B. Traders Vs Deputy Commercial Tax Officer (Madras High Court)
Appeal Number : W.P. No. 25810 of 2024
Date of Judgement/Order : 05/09/2024
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

R.B. Traders Vs Deputy Commercial Tax Officer (Madras High Court)

Madras HC held that passing of order without providing opportunity of personal hearing is against principles of natural justice. Accordingly, order set aside and directed to provide an opportunity to the Petitioner to establish their case on merits.

Facts- This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 01.04.2024 passed by the first respondent and for a direction to the second and third respondents to defreeze the bank account of the petitioner. Petitioner submits that all notices/communications were uploaded under the “Additional Notices Column” in the GST portal. However, the petitioner, being a small business entity, was unaware of the notices uploaded on the GST portal.

Conclusion- Held that the respondent passed the orders, which are impugned herein without providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and hence, the same is in violation of the principles of natural justice. According to the petitioner, they had already paid around 90% of the tax before the authority concerned. Thus, this Court is of the opinion that it is just and necessary to provide an opportunity to the Petitioner to establish their case on merits and in accordance with law. Accordingly, the order impugned herein is set aside.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 01.04.2024 passed by the first respondent and for a direction to the second and third respondents to defreeze the bank account of the petitioner.

2. Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran, learned Government Advocate (Taxes) takes notice on behalf of the first and second respondents.

3. By consent of the parties, the main writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that all notices/communications were uploaded under the “Additional Notices Column” in the GST portal. However, the petitioner, being a small business entity, was unaware of the notices uploaded on the GST portal. Additionally, their consultant, on whom the petitioner relied for GST compliance, failed to communicate the proceedings, resulting in the petitioner’s inability to file a reply within the stipulated time. While so, without providing any opportunity to the petitioner, the respondent passed the impugned order, which is in violation of the principles of natural justice. The learned counsel would also submit that the petitioner had already deposited approximately 90% of tax before the authority concerned.

5. Heard the learned Government Advocate (Taxes) appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, who made her submissions supporting the orders impugned herein.

6. It is evident from the pleadings and the documents placed before this Court that the respondent passed the orders, which are impugned herein without providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and hence, the same is in violation of the principles of natural justice. According to the petitioner, they had already paid around 90% of the tax before the authority concerned.

7. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that it is just and necessary to provide an opportunity to the Petitioner to establish their case on merits and in accordance with law. Accordingly, the order impugned herein is set aside. Consequently, the attachment order issued by the second respondent shall stand lifted. The petitioner shall file their reply/objection along with the required documents, if any, to the respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this On filing of such reply/objection by the petitioner, the respondent shall consider the same after issuing a 14 days clear notice by fixing the date of personal hearing and thereafter pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible.

8. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed No costs.

Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

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
Ads Free tax News and Updates
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
December 2024
M T W T F S S
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031