• twitter-icon
Unlimited Tax Return Filing


Calcutta HC: Non-compliance with the Statutory Provision of Section 75(4) Invalidates the GST Order

Calcutta HC's Order in Case of Arup Mallick VS Commissioner, Commercial Taxes and State Tax

It was ruled by the Calcutta High Court that the failure to comply with the legal provisions which obligate the consideration of explanation on the taxpayer’s end before passing the adverse order, breaches these orders.

It was ruled by the High Court that so while acknowledging that the applicant was prevented from filing his reply to the SCN as of the reasonable cause.

Single Bench of Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury Directing to Section 75(4) of the CGST/WBGST Act, 2017, noted that providing a chance of hearing is obligated where a request is obtained in writing from the person levied with tax or penalty or where any adverse decision is considered against the same person.

Case Fact

The taxpayer approached the writ court complaining that a SCN was furnished on the applicant in Form GST DRC-01, but, even after allowing the applicant to furnish his reply, the department respondent passed an order without furnishing enough chance of hearing.

Final Decision

The bench directed the submission of the taxpayer’s counsel that the applicant cannot furnish his reply within the said time being unwell.

The Bench acknowledged that, according to the law, if the Department plans to issue an unfavourable order, it must give the assessee the right to a personal hearing. If this opportunity is not given to the assessee, it is a violation of the statutory requirement.

The bench acknowledged that a final order made by a proper officer under Section 73 of the Act, without providing a proper hearing, is not valid.

Despite receiving a show cause notice in Form GST DRC01, the petitioner did not submit any response, as they were unwell, and they provided medical prescriptions to support this, according to the Bench.

After considering the possibility of an unfavourable ruling for the petitioner, the High Court returned the case to the appropriate officer, instructing them to reevaluate the issues presented in the show-cause notice by providing the petitioner or their representative with a chance for a personal hearing.

Case TitleArup Mallick VS Commissioner, Commercial Taxes and State Tax
CitationWPA 15853 of 2024
Date12.08.2024
For the PetitionerMr. Debasish Ghosh
Mr. Partha Sen
For the StateMr. Anirban Ray, Ld. GP
Md. T. M. Siddiqui
Mr. Tanoy Chakraborty
Mr. Saptak Sanyal
Mr. S. Shaw
For Union of IndiaMr. Vipul Kundalia
Ms. Smita Das De
Calcutta High CourtRead Order

Disclaimer:- "All the information given is from credible and authentic resources and has been published after moderation. Any change in detail or information other than fact must be considered a human error. The blog we write is to provide updated information. You can raise any query on matters related to blog content. Also, note that we don’t provide any type of consultancy so we are sorry for being unable to reply to consultancy queries. Also, we do mention that our replies are solely on a practical basis and we advise you to cross verify with professional authorities for a fact check."

Published by Arpit Kulshrestha
Arpit Kulshrestha seeks higher interests in financial services, taxation, GST, I-T, etc. Writes articles with depth knowledge and is extensive for the same. The resources provide effective articles for the products of SAG infotech which provides taxation and IT software. Writing from observations and researching makes his articles virtuous. View more posts
SAGINFOTECH PRODUCTS

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Follow Us on Google News

Google News

Latest Posts

New Offer for Professionals

Super Tax Offer

Upto 20% Off
Tax, ROC/MCA, XBRL, Payroll, Online GST

Limited Offer, Hurry

Big Offer for Tax Experts

Upto 20% Discount on Tax Software

    Select Product*

    Current GST Due Dates