Case Details: Max Hair Clinic (P.) Ltd. v. State Tax officer - [2024] 167 taxmann.com 553 (Madras)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Krishnan Ramasamy, J.
- N. Viswanathan, for the Petitioner.
- T.N.C. Kaushik, Addl. Govt. Pleader for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner was served with a notice to show cause as to why the entire input tax credit availed on the basis of the invoices issued by the supplier, whose registration was suspended, should not be paid along with interest. Thereafter, demand order was issued and it filed writ petition to challenge the demand and penalty order and contended that the order was passed without affording any opportunity of personal hearing.
The department submitted that the petitioner did not respond to the notice and it was provided ample opportunity. It was also provided reminder notice and personal hearing opportunity but the same was not availed by the petitioner.
High Court Held
The Honorable High Court noted that the petitioner had not availed opportunity of personal hearing nor submitted explanation clarifying discrepancies pointed out in show cause notice. Moreover, the Court also noted that the petitioner filed writ petition without exhausting the alternative remedy of appeal. Therefore, it was held that the impugned order passed by the department was justified and the writ petition was not maintainable.
The post HC Dismissed Writ as Assessee Didn’t Avail Opportunity of Personal Hearing Nor Submitted Explanation Clarifying Discrepancies appeared first on Taxmann Blog.
