Case Law Details
Sendhil Kumar Vs State Tax Officer (Madras High Court)
Madras High Court held that no personal hearing has been granted to the petitioner as contemplated under Section 75 (4) of the GST Act, 2017 and importantly adverse decision is taken by the respondent. Hence, impugned assessment order is liable to be quashed on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice.
Facts- This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned assessment order dated 28.12.2022 for the assessment year 2021-2022 on the ground that no personal hearing was afforded to the petitioner in the impugned assessment proceedings.
In the impugned assessment order, the tax liability of the petitioner has been determined under the CGST and SGST at Rs.4,44,292/- and a penalty of Rs.4,44,292/- has been imposed, totalling a sum of Rs.8,88,584/-.
The petitioner contends that as per Section 75 (4) of the GST Act, 2017, personal hearing ought to have been afforded to the petitioner since an adverse decision has been taken by the respondent under the impugned assessment order.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
