Stay updated
Impugned order based on report from proper officer regarding survey conducted on 24.03.2018, which had not been confirmed or communicated to petitioner for their response was set aside, finding them unsustainable due to the failure to provide the petitioner an opportunity to address the adverse material.
Section 35(3) prohibits proceedings under Section 130 for alleged excess stock found during the survey. Proceedings should have been initiated under Section 73 & 74 for excess stock.
Confiscation of stock based on estimate is illegal; HC slams authorities for acting in a callous manner: HC
Provisional attachment under Section 83 cannot be done without issuing proper notice under section 74 of CGST Act, 2017
HC quashes assessment order as it didn’t satisfy ingredients of Section 74 of CGST Act
The Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Jyanata Ghosh held that an Appellate Authority cannot dismiss an appeal on ground of limitation without affording any opportunity of hearing. The delay can be condoned if the principles of natural justice has been violated by not providing an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner. The prescribed period of 30 days from the date of communication of the adjudication order and the discretionary period of 30 days, aggregating to 60 days is not final. Hence, the period for filing an appeal can be extended by the Appellate Authority.
The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Mgs Palace v. State of Uttar Pradesh [Writ Tax No. 1390…