Lakshmi Mobile Accessories vs Joint Commissioner (Intelligence & Enforcement) & Anr.
Facts:
The petitioner challenged the show cause notice dated 29.07.2024 issued under Section 74 of the CGST Act proposing tax, interest and penalty for the financial years 2018-19 to 2023-24. The petitioner apprehended that the authorities would pass a composite adjudication order covering multiple financial years and sought direction for passing separate orders and granting opportunity for cross-examination.
Court Decision:
The Court held that at the stage of show cause notice there was no material to assume that the authorities would adopt a procedure contrary to law or deny opportunity of hearing. Therefore, interference with the show cause notice was not warranted.
However, considering the limitation period for passing order for the financial year 2017-18, the Court permitted the authority to pass an order for that year within the prescribed limitation after granting opportunity of hearing. For the subsequent financial years, the Court observed that separate adjudication orders ought to be issued for each year even if the show cause notice is composite, and directed the authority to pass separate orders after granting reasonable opportunity of hearing. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions.
Cases Referred by Court:
· W.P.(C) No.35156 of 2024 (Kerala High Court)
Other Case Law
Taj Garden Retreat vs. State of Kerala & Anr.
Validity of show cause notice issued beyond reasonable period of limitation – Section 45A of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963.
Facts:An inspection was conducted at the premises of the assesse on 08.03.2012 i...
Read MoreManoj Ramkishan Agrawal & Anr. vs. Union of India & Anr.
Whether a separate penalty under Section 122(1A) of the CGST Act, 2017 can be imposed on partners of a firm for fraudulent availment/passing on of ITC, and whether a writ under Article 226 is maintainable where an efficacious appellate remedy under Sectio
BackgroundThe petitioners are partners of M/s. Maa Renuka Trading Company, Indor...
Read MoreCommissioner of Trade and Taxes, Delhi v. Arise India Limited
Validity of denial of input tax credit under Delhi VAT law; scope of liability for purchasing dealers (Sections involved: Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 – provisions relating to Input Tax Credit)
Facts:The case arose from a batch of matters decided by the Delhi High Court con...
Read More