Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S., JJ
The Joint Commissioner – Appellant
Versus
Nishad K.U. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Easwaran S., J.
To what extent does the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 permit reading in the principles of natural justice? The intra- court appeal preferred by respondents 1 to 4 in the writ petition challenging the judgment dated 17.12.2024 in WP(C)No.26732/2024 raises this seminal question of law.
2. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the appeal are as follows:
The 1st respondent was visited with proceedings under Section 74(9) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (in short, ‘CGST Act’]. He was further visited with an order imposing a tax and penalty of more than Rs.9.40 Crores under the statutory provisions. Despite the availability of an alternate remedy, the 1st respondent herein approached the writ court alleging a serious infraction of the principles of natural justice, insofar as there was a failure to accede to his request for cross-examination of persons, whose statements were obtained during the enquiry and which were relied upon by the authority while passing the order of penalty.
3. The appellants contended before the learned Single Judge that under the scheme of the CGST Act, there is no mandate for granting permission to cross-e
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.
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 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.
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 failure to provide cross-examination in adjudication proceedings under Section 138-B of the Customs Act violates natural justice unless a request for cross-examination was explicitly made by the ....
The court emphasized the mandatory nature of granting an opportunity of hearing as per the statutory provisions of the CGST Act and reiterated that the availability of an alternate remedy does not ba....
The court established that the provisions of the Customs Act do not guarantee an absolute right to cross-examine witnesses in adjudication proceedings, and the denial of such a right does not inheren....
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
