Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.SARAVANAN, J
Tvl.Nellai Agencies – Appellant
Versus
The Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court identified order's non-speaking nature and its implications. (Para 4 , 6) |
| 2. final judgment to quash order and require proper hearing. (Para 7 , 8) |
ORDER
Mr.K.Asok Kumar, CGSPC takes notice for the first respondent and Mr.R.Suresh Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents 3 to 5.
2.The petitioner has challenged the impugned order passed by the fifth respondent bearing Ref.No.ZD331223265640Q dated 29.12.2023.
3.The specific case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has not been issued with a notice in Form DRC-01A. That apart, it is submitted that the petitioner has also not been issued with the personal hearing notice. On merits, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there is a minor discrepancy in the returns that were filed. However, the input tax credit has been wrongly denied by the respondent.
4.The learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the petitioner may be given one opportunity of being heard. That apart, it is submitted that the impugned order has been passed based on the notifications issued contrary to Section 168A of the CGST Act, 2017 and prayed for setting aside the i
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
