![]()
Case Details: M/s. Landmark Creations vs. The Deputy State Tax
Officer & Anr.
Case Number: W.P.
No. 22427 of 2024 & W.M.P. Nos. 24422, 24424 & 24427 of 2024
Court: High
Court of Judicature at Madras
Date of Order: 20th
August 2024
Presiding Judge: Honourable
Mr. Justice Krishnan Ramasamy
Summary of the Case: The
petitioner, M/s. Landmark Creations, challenged the order dated 25th May 2023
passed by the Deputy State Tax Officer under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017.
The order was contested on the grounds that it was passed without jurisdiction,
arbitrarily, and in violation of the principles of natural justice.
Facts of the Case:
·
The petitioner, a small business, argued
that all notices and communications related to the case were uploaded under the
"Additional Notices Column" on the GST portal.
·
The petitioner was unaware of these
notices due to their small business status, leading to a failure in filing a
reply within the stipulated time.
·
Subsequently, the respondent passed the
impugned order without providing the petitioner an opportunity to be heard.
Submission by Petitioner:
·
The petitioner argued that the impugned
order was passed without providing an opportunity for a personal hearing, which
is a violation of the principles of natural justice.
·
They further mentioned that they had
already deposited 10% of the tax before the concerned authority.
Submission by Respondent:
·
The respondent, represented by the learned
Government Advocate, supported the orders passed and contended that the due
process was followed.
Findings and Judgement of
the Court:
·
The court found that the respondent passed
the impugned order without providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the
petitioner, violating the principles of natural justice.
·
The court opined that it was necessary to
provide the petitioner an opportunity to establish their case on merits.
·
The court set aside the impugned order and
directed the respondent to provide a clear 14-day notice for a personal
hearing. The petitioner was given two weeks to file their reply or objections.
Conclusion:
The writ petition was
disposed of with the order that the petitioner be allowed to file their
objections and be given a personal hearing. The respondent was instructed to
pass appropriate orders on merits after considering the petitioner's
submission.
Disclaimer: All the Information is based on the notification, circular and order issued by the Govt. authority and judgement delivered by the court or the authority information is strictly for educational purposes and on the basis of our best understanding of laws & not binding on anyone.
Click here
