Tvl. Sri Nallamal Steels Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC) (Madras High Court)
The Madras High Court recently rendered a significant judgment in the case of Tvl. Sri Nallamal Steels versus Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC). The court addressed the issue of disregarding adjournment requests and the lack of reasonable hearing opportunities provided to the petitioner. Let’s delve into a detailed analysis of the judgment.
Analysis: The petitioner, Tvl. Sri Nallamal Steels, challenged separate orders dated 08.02.2024 concerning financial years 2018-2019, 2019-2020, 2020-2021, and 2021-2022. The impugned orders stemmed from show cause notices issued on 05.02.2024, except for the notice concerning the financial year 2021-2022, which was dated 18.12.2023.
Despite the petitioner’s request for an adjournment due to the illness of the authorized representative, the court noted that the adjournment request was disregarded, and orders were passed on 08.02.2024. The court highlighted that a similar disregard for the petitioner’s reply occurred concerning the financial year 2021-2022.
The learned Government Advocate, representing the respondent, acknowledged that the petitioner requested an adjournment only for the financial year 2021-2022.
The court observed that for financial years 2018-2019, 2019-2020, and 2020-2021, the lack of reasonable opportunity was evident, as the show cause notices and subsequent orders were issued within a short timeframe, without due consideration to the adjournment request.
