Disposed

Valli Traders v. Assistant Commissioner (St)

Madras HC28 Oct 2024WP/31724/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

GST assessment order challenged for being passed without personal hearing. The court found violation of natural justice, set aside the order and remanded the matter to the assessing authority for fresh consideration after affording the petitioner hearing.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 27.08.2024 set aside; matter remanded to respondent for fresh consideration with notice of personal hearing.

Valli Traders Vs Assistant Commissioner (St) — GST and Indirect Tax | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.No.31724 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Dated : 28.10.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

¶6

W.P.No.31724 of 2024 & W.M.P.Nos.34463 & 34464 of 2024

¶7

Valli Traders, Rep by its Proprietor, P.Subramaniam, D-9, 2^nd Floor, Madani Complex, 100 Feet Road, Gandhipuram, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641 012

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

Assistant Commissioner (ST), Gandhipuram Assessment Circle, First Floor, Commercial Taxes Building, Dr.Balasundaram Road, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641 018

¶11

... Respondents

¶12

Prayer:

¶13

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records relating to the impugned order dated 27.08.2024 bearing Ref.No.GSTIN: 33EIBPS7453A2XE/2019-20 passed by the respondent and quash the

¶14

1/6

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

W.P.No.31724 of 2024

¶17

same.

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Elangovan For Respondent : Ms.Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran, Government Advocate

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 27.08.2024 passed by the respondent.

¶21

Ms.Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran, learned Government Advocate, takes notice on behalf of the respondent. By consent of the parties, the main writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶22

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that initially, a show cause notice was issued by the respondent on 28.05.2024, for which a detailed reply was filed by the petitioner on 24.06.2024. Thereafter, without providing any opportunity of personal hearing, the impugned order came to be passed by the respondent. Hence, this petition has been filed.

¶23

2/6

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶25

W.P.No.31724 of 2024

¶26

4. In reply, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent also fairly admitted that no opportunity of personal hearing was provided to the petitioner prior to the passing of impugned order. Therefore, he requested this Court to remit the matter back to the respondent.

¶27

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate for the respondent and also perused the materials available on record.

¶28

In the case on hand, it is clear that no opportunity of personal

¶29

hearing was provided to the petitioner prior to the passing of impugned order. Hence, this Court is of the view that the impugned order was passed in violation of principles of natural justice since it is just and necessary to provide an opportunity to the petitioner to establish their case on merits. In such view of the matter, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order dated 27.08.2024 passed by the respondent. Accordingly, this Court passes the following order:- 3/6

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶31

W.P.No.31724 of 2024

¶32

(i) The impugned order dated 27.08.2024 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the respondent for fresh consideration.

¶33

(ii) The petitioner shall file their reply/objection along with the required documents, if any, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶34

(iii) On filing of such reply/objection by the petitioner, the respondent shall consider the same and issue a 14 days clear notice, by fixing the date of personal hearing, to the petitioner and thereafter, pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, after hearing the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible.

¶35

7. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No

¶36

costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed.

¶37

4/6

¶38

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶39

W.P.No.31724 of 2024

¶40

Speaking/Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No nsa

¶41

28.10.2024

¶42

To Assistant Commissioner (ST), Gandhipuram Assessment Circle, First Floor, Commercial Taxes Building, Dr.Balasundaram Road, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641 018

¶43

5/6

¶44

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶45

W.P.No.31724 of 2024

¶46

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY.J.,

¶47

nsa

¶48

W.P.No.31724 of 2024 & W.M.P.Nos.34463 & 34464 of 2024

¶49

28.10.2024

¶50

6/6

¶51

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Valli Traders v. Assistant Commissioner (St)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Valli Traders v. Assistant Commissioner (St)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G.Swaminathan Vs the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer (St)

M/S.Cheran Holdings Private Limited Vs the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Vivin, Vs The Asst Commissioner (St)

G Square Realtors Private Limited Vs the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Tvl Sri Ramesh Construction Vs The Commercial Tax Officer

Insoorya Express Cargo Vs the Assistant Commissioner (St)