Back
ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL
Modern Steel – Appellant
Versus
Additional Commissioner – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition challenges orders due to procedural irregularities. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. petitioner argues denial of personal hearing. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. opposition asserts appeal's dismissal based on limitation. (Para 6) |
| 4. court's assessments of procedural rights. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. court distinguishes case due to lack of response. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 6. clarification of limitation application in special statutes. (Para 13) |
| 7. court remands case under new provisions for appeal consideration. (Para 14 , 15) |
| 8. final ruling and remand for reconsideration. (Para 16) |
JUDGMENT
Rohit Ranjan Agarwal, J.
Heard Sri Aditya Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.S.Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the State.
2. This writ petition has been filed assailing the notice dated 17.02.2022 issued by respondent No.2 and the order passed on 22.03.2022 as well as the order passed on 11.08.2023 dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner as being time barred.
3. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a proprietorship firm registered under both the U.P. Goods and Service Tax Act (hereinafter called as "UPGST Act") and Central Goods and Service Tax Act (hereinafter called as "C
The court ruled that personal hearing rights depend on a formal request by the assessee, and decisions on limitation for appeals under special statutes cannot be easily extended without valid justifi....
The issuance of the Show Cause Notice was timely under Section 73 of the CGST Act, and the petitioner was afforded adequate opportunity for a hearing, thereby validating the demand order.
The court affirmed that while the CGST Act imposes strict limitations on appeals, such limitations do not apply in writ proceedings, allowing for the restoration of the appeal based on merits.
The court emphasized the mandatory requirement of granting a hearing under Section 75(4) of the GST Act before making any adverse decisions.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the time period for filing an appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act, considering the extension granted by the Hon’ble Supr....
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
