Back
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
Nishad K. U. – Appellant
Versus
Joint Commissioner, Central Tax And Central Excise, CGST Kochi Commissionerate – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Bechu Kurian Thomas, J.)
Petitioner is a registered taxpayer under the laws relating to Goods and Services Tax. He challenges an order imposing a penalty of more than Rs.9.40 Crores, under section 74(9) of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short 'CGST Act') apart from a further amount of Rs.9.40 Crores under section 122(1) of the State Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short ‘SGST Act’) and consequential interest and other penalties. Though an appeal is available to the petitioner under section 107 of the CGST/SGST Act, the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been invoked, alleging that the principles of natural justice have been violated while issuing the impugned order.
2. Petitioner is the proprietor of a plywood business by name 'M/s.Wood Tunes Enterprises'. As per Ext.P1 show cause notice, petitioner was called upon to explain why the penalty proposed therein ought not to be imposed for alleged willful misstatements and suppression of facts with intent to evade payment of GST. It was stated therein that the statements of 20 different persons were taken, indicating that the petitioner had indulged in fake registrations and s
The court established that denying a party the right to cross-examine witnesses whose statements are relied upon in a penalty order violates principles of natural justice, rendering the order null.
The principles of natural justice, including the right to cross-examine witnesses, must be observed in adjudication proceedings under the CGST Act, 2017, rendering any violation void.
Breach of principles of natural justice and defiance of fundamental principles of judicial procedure falls within exceptions noticed by Supreme Court in the above decision, wherein availability of an....
The right to cross-examine in tax proceedings is context-dependent, and denial does not constitute a breach of natural justice if sufficient opportunity to contest the findings is provided.
A party may challenge an order under Article 227 of the Constitution only when fundamental rights are breached or if there's a violation of natural justice; otherwise, adherence to alternative remedi....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to adhere to the principles of natural justice, including the grant of adequate opportunities for hearing and cross-examination ....
The denial of cross-examination in quasi-judicial proceedings does not inherently violate natural justice, especially when alternative remedies are available.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
