Calcutta High Court Sets Aside The Order Of Asst. commissioner, GST, For Not Complying Natural Justice

Update: 2022-07-08 13:45 GMT

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Md. Nizamuddin has held that an order passed without granting a personal hearing violates principles of natural justice. The petitioner/assessee has challenged the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner. The order was passed on the basis of a show-cause notice under Section 74 of the WBGST Act, 2017, on the ground of violation of the...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Md. Nizamuddin has held that an order passed without granting a personal hearing violates principles of natural justice.

The petitioner/assessee has challenged the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner. The order was passed on the basis of a show-cause notice under Section 74 of the WBGST Act, 2017, on the ground of violation of the principle of natural justice by not providing an opportunity of personal hearing in spite of the specific request made by the petitioner in its reply. From the order, nowhere it appeared that petitioner was given any opportunity of personal hearing or petitioner's request for personal hearing was considered and/or rejected.

The department could not contradict the admitted position that it appears from the record that in spite of the specific request for a personal hearing, no personal hearing was given to the petitioner.

The court set aside the order dated March 9, 2022.

The court remanded the matter back to the officer concerned to pass a fresh order after giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner within four weeks from the date of communication of the order.

Case Title: Suraj Singh Vs. Assistant Commissioner

Case No: W.P.A. 12749 of 2022

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Cal) 264 

Dated: 05.07.2022

Counsel For Petitioner: Advocates Sutapa Roy Chowdhury, Abhijat Das, Aratrika Roy

Counsel For Respondent: Advocates A. Ray, S. Mukherjee, D. Ghosh, V. Kothari

Click Here To Read/Download Order

Tags:    

Similar News