The impugned order is set aside solely for the purpose of facilitating consideration of writ petitioner's objections/explanation and giving a personal hearing to the writ petitioner which the fourth respondent has opted to give by his own volition.
Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017 –– Personal Hearing –– The petitioner challenged order dated 09.01.2019, pertaining to assessment years 2017- 18 and 2018-19. The petitioner had raised an invoice prior to GST Act. The respondent issued SCN dated 01.12.2018. The petitioner did not directly respond to the above SCN, but chose to write to the Executive Engineer of Public Works Department and a copy of the same was marked to the respondent. The respondent counsel submitted that there would have been no difficulty if the Writ Petitioner had directly responded to the SCN, instead of writing to the Executive Engineer of Public Works. The Court observed that a quietus can be given to the writ petition by setting aside the impugned order and ensuring that an opportunity of hearing in person is given to the writ petitioner as the SCN clearly mentions that the writ petitioner should appear in person and explain.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court quashed the impugned order.
The impugned order is set aside solely for the purpose of facilitating consideration of writ petitioner's objections/explanation and giving a personal hearing to the writ petitioner which the fourth respondent has opted to give by his own volition.
Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017 –– Personal Hearing –– The petitioner challenged order dated 09.01.2019, pertaining to assessment years 2017- 18 and 2018-19. The petitioner had raised an invoice prior to GST Act. The respondent issued SCN dated 01.12.2018. The petitioner did not directly respond to the above SCN, but chose to write to the Executive Engineer of Public Works Department and a copy of the same was marked to the respondent. The respondent counsel submitted that there would have been no difficulty if the Writ Petitioner had directly responded to the SCN, instead of writing to the Executive Engineer of Public Works. The Court observed that a quietus can be given to the writ petition by setting aside the impugned order and ensuring that an opportunity of hearing in person is given to the writ petitioner as the SCN clearly mentions that the writ petitioner should appear in person and explain.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court quashed the impugned order.