Fair Hearing: M/S Gaurav Enterprises vs. State of U.P.
CA
Latest Resources
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | |
Table of Contents
The court allows the present writ petition, setting aside the order dated 25.11.2022, and remits the matter to the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Sector-6, Aligarh, to issue a fresh notice with a specified date for the hearing. This decision aligns with the judgment in Writ Tax No. 551 of 2023, ensuring fairness and adherence to legal procedures.
The petitioner, M/S Gaurav Enterprises, contests an order dated 04.02.2023, which raised GST liability under The Goods and Services Tax Act, Section 74. The petitioner argues that no hearing opportunity was provided, as the show cause notice issued on 09.10.2022 did not specify a date for the hearing.
The petitioner asserts that the absence of a hearing opportunity violates principles of natural justice. They cite a similar case, Writ Tax No. 551 of 2023 (M/S Mohini Traders vs. State of U.P.), where the court ruled against the absence of a hearing opportunity.
Considering the petitioner’s argument and the principles of natural justice, the court agrees that denying a hearing opportunity is unfair. Consequently, the court annuls the order dated 25.11.2022 due to the lack of adequate hearing opportunity.
CA Shafaly Girdharwal
CA
New Delhi, India
CA Shaifaly Girdharwal is a GST consultant, Author, Trainer and a famous You tuber. She has taken many seminars on various topics of GST. She is Partner at Ashu Dalmia & Associates and heading the Indirect Tax department. She has authored a book on GST published by Taxmann.
Recieve the most important tips and updates
Absolutely Free! Unsubscribe anytime.
We adhere 100% to the no-spam policy.
