![]()
An
order passed without granting an opportunity for a hearing is not maintainable
and constitutes a violation of the principles of natural justice
Case Summary: Tvl. Sakthi Precision vs. State Tax Officer
Case No. W.P.No.21500
of 2024
Date of Order: 12.08.2024
Court: High
Court of Judicature at Madras
Judge:
Honourable Mr. Justice Krishnan Ramasamy
Facts of the Case:
The petitioner, Tvl.
Sakthi Precision, sought to quash the order dated 31.10.2023 issued by the
respondent under Section 73 of the TNGST Act, 2017/CGST Act, 2017, along with a
consequential notice for the attachment and sale of immovable property dated 10.07.2024.
The petitioner contended that they were unaware of the pre-assessment notice
(DRC-01) and other subsequent notices uploaded on the GST portal because the
petitioner’s Consultant failed to inform them. Consequently, they missed the
opportunity to file replies within the stipulated time. The respondent
proceeded to issue the impugned orders without granting an opportunity for
personal hearing, violating the principles of natural justice.
Submissions by the
Petitioner:
The petitioner argued
that they were not provided with an opportunity to respond to the notices due
to the failure of their Consultant to inform them of the uploaded notices on
the GST portal. They emphasized that the orders and the notice for attachment
of the property were passed without a hearing, violating natural justice. The
petitioner further noted that they had already deposited 10% of the tax demand
on 13.03.2024.
Submissions by the
Respondent:
The respondent supported
the impugned orders, asserting that they were passed following due process and
that the petitioner’s failure to reply was their responsibility.
Findings and Judgement of
the Court:
The court found that the
orders passed by the respondent were in violation of the principles of natural
justice as they were issued without providing the petitioner an opportunity to
be heard. The court acknowledged that the petitioner had already made a
pre-deposit payment of 10% of the demand. Therefore, the court set aside the
impugned orders dated 31.10.2023 and 10.07.2024 and remanded the matter to the
respondent for fresh consideration. The court directed the petitioner to submit
their reply within two weeks, after which the respondent must issue a 14-day
notice for a personal hearing before passing a new order on the matter.
Conclusion: The
impugned orders were quashed due to the violation of natural justice, and the
matter was remanded for reconsideration, providing the petitioner with the
opportunity to present their case.
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
