Shido Pharma vs. The Assistant Commissioner & Others
(Madras High Court, )

Case Law
Petitioner / Applicant
Shido Pharma
Respondent
The Assistant Commissioner & Others
Court
Madras High Court
State
Date
Apr 3, 2023
Order No.
W.P.Nos.10371, 10372 & 10373 of 2023 And WMP.Nos.10334, 10335 & 10336 of 2023
TR Citation
2023 (4) TR 7211
Related HSN Chapter/s
N/A
Related HSN Code
N/A

ORDER

COMMON ORDER

Mrs. E.Ranganayaki, Additional Government Pleader accepts notice for the respondents and is armed with necessary instructions. The officer is also present before this court to enable the disposal of this petition even at this juncture.

2. The petitioner challenges an order of Goods detention under Section 129 (3) of the State Goods and Services Act, 2017 (in short ‘SGST Act’), read with the relevant provisions of the CGST Act, 2017/IGST Act, 2017/GST(Compensation to States) Act, 2017. The main ground is that the petitioner was not offered any hearing prior to passing of the impugned order.

3. Learned Standing Counsel was requested to produce the records to ascertain this aspect of the matter and has produced a record of personal hearing on 24.03.2023, where the presence of the petitioner is noted. However, that personal hearing is with reference to a notice issued by the respondent on 18.03.2023, that had proposed an addition under the provisions of the Intergrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017(in short ‘IGST Act’).

4. The petitioner had filed a detailed reply on 24.03.2023 stating that the provisions of the IGST Act are inapplicable to the transaction in question. On the same date, the respondent has issued a revised notice, in Form GST MOV – 07 proceeding to apply the applicable provisions of the CGST/SGST Act.

5. However, no opportunity was granted to the petitioner to respond to that notice and the petitioner was further never heard. What had transpired on 24.03.2023 was a hearing only in respect of notice dated 18.03.2023 and not subsequent notice dated 24.03.2023.

6. Thus, there is some merit in the allegation that the proceedings have been concluded contrary to the principles of natural justice. Impugned orders bearing Nos.889/2022-23/ADJ, 892/2022-23/ADJ and 890/2022-23/ADJ, all dated 24.03.2023, are thus set aside.

7. The petitioner is permitted to appear before the 1st respondent on 05.04.2023 at 10.30 a.m., without expecting any further notice in this regard along with a reply to notice dated 24.03.2023. After hearing the petitioner and considering the reply, if any, orders shall be passed de novo within a period of one week from 05.04.2023.

8. These Writ Petitions are allowed in the above terms. No costs.

Connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

Please Wait
  • Home
  • /
  • caselaw
  • /
  • shido pharma vs the assistant commissioner others high court order 7211

BUSY is a simple, yet powerful GST / VAT compliant Business Accounting Software that has everything you need to grow your business.

phone Sales & Support:

+91 82 82 82 82 82
+91 11 - 4096 4096