Case Details: Rays Power Infrastructure (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes - [2024] 169 taxmann.com 151 (Karnataka)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- C.M. Poonacha, J.
- H.R. Kambiyavar, Patri Shahikala K. & Smt. Joshna P. Dhanave, Advs. for the Petitioner.
- Shivaprabhu S. Hiremath, AGA, Venkatesh M. Kharvi & Girish Hulmani, Advs. for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The assessee was engaged in the supply of Electrical Transformers, Structures, other tubular steel poles for electric transmission and distribution lines and supply of services like works contract services, etc. A show cause notice was issued to the assessee under Section 73 of the CGST Act and Section 50, 73(9) of the CGST Act as also Rule 142(1a), to which the assessee had replied. Unsatisfied with the reply, the Assessing Authority (AA) passed an order determining the tax, interest and penalty.
The assessee filed a writ petition before the Karnataka High Court contending that the order was passed without affording personal hearing as it sought by the assessee and in a mechanical manner.
High Court Held
The High Court held that the various contentions raised by the assessee in the reply notice have not even been considered, and no order has been passed by the AA with regard to the same. Further, the assessee had specifically sought a personal hearing in its reply. However, it was not forthcoming from the impugned order that a personal hearing was afforded as sought by the assessee. Hence, the High Court allowed the writ petition and quashed the order passed by the AA.
The post Order Quashed as Various Contentions Raised by Assessee in Reply Were Not Considered and Personal Hearing Was Not Granted | HC appeared first on Taxmann Blog.
