I-T - Order u/s 142 is required to be communicated to assessee, so as to know reasons, and, if required, assessee could choose to exercise option to challenge order: SC

GST - Opportunity of personal hearing is to be provided when any adverse decision is contemplated, even without any request for personal hearing on the part of the party concerned: HC

GST - Cryptic and non-reasoned order - Respondent to issue a fresh SCN by incorporating details and thereafter to provide reasonable opportunity of hearing: HC

CX - Once Resolution Plan is approved and order has been given under IBC Code, which has been also confirmed by NCLAT, same would have an overriding effect over all other laws including CEA, 1944 and, therefore, appeal does not survive: HC

Cus - Petitioner is unpaid seller and wishes to take back the goods - However, Respondent has initiated auction - Buyer to be impleaded, notice issued: HC

2023-TIOL-108-HC-AHM-GST

Eagle Fibres Ltd Vs State of Gujarat

GST - Petitioner is seeking direction to set aside the ex parte order passed in FORM GST DRC-07 dated 14.04.2022 passed by the respondent no.2 without following the principles of natural justice.

Held: It is not disputed that the personal hearing had not been granted in the instant case - It is an ex parte order in Form GST DRC-07 passed on 14.04.2022 by making the addition of huge amount of tax, interest and penalty of Rs. 2.40 crores - Decision of this Court in case of Alkem Laboratories Ltd. = 2021-TIOL-328-HC-AHM-GST and other decisions will need to come to the rescue of the petitioner which insist on providing the opportunity of personal hearing when any adverse decision is contemplated, even without any request for personal hearing on the part of the party concerned - Petition is ALLOWED quashing and setting aside the impugned order of assessment with all consequential proceedings - Respondent is at liberty to initiate the proceedings from the stage where it had been left, by affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner - Petition is disposed of: High Court [para 4, 5, 6]

- Petition disposed of: GUJARAT HIGH COURT

2023-TIOL-107-HC-AHM-GST

Siddharth Associates Vs STO

GST - Petitioner challenges the action of the respondent authority essentially on two counts firstly, because the order of cancellation of registration is in breach of principles of natural justice being very cryptic and non-reasoned order and secondly, the appellate authority on the ground of its not having powers to condone the delay has chosen not to decide the matter on merit.

Held: Following the Coordinate Bench's decision in case of Aggarwal Dyeing & Printing Works ( = 2022-TIOL-504-HC-AHM-GST ), this petition is ALLOWED solely on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice - The show cause notice dated 29.11.2021 and the impugned orders dated 25.03.2022 and 22.09.2022 passed by the respondent authorities are quashed and set aside granting liberty to the respondent No.2 to issue a fresh show cause notice with particular reasons incorporated with details and thereafter to provide reasonable opportunity of hearing to the writ applicant and to pass appropriate speaking order on merit - GST Registration Number of the applicant stands restored forthwith: High Court [para 10]

- Petition allowed: GUJARAT HIGH COURT

2023-TIOL-106-HC-AHM-CX

Garden Silk Mills Vs CCE & Customs

CX - Present application is preferred by the original respondent on the ground that the pending Tax Appeal has become infructuous and non est in view of the order passed on 01.01.2021 by the National Company Law Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench; in exercise of its power under Section 31 (1) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

Held: It appears that the approval order of the NCLT came to be challenged by the respondent by way of Company Application (Insolvency) No.174 of 2021 (‘the NCLAT' hereinafter) which has been disposed of on 27.07.2021 by the NCLAT, New Delhi Bench in favour of the applicant dismissing the claims made by the respondent and upholding the Resolution Plan (RP) as approved - There does not appear to be any further challenge before the Apex Court after once the NCLAT has approved the Resolution Plan - In wake of the settled position of the law, once the RP is approved and the approval order has been given under Section 31(1) of the Code, which has been also confirmed by the NCLAT, the same would have an overriding effect over all other laws including the Central Excise Act, 1944 and therefore, appeal does not survive - Court notices that the Tax Appeal is admitted on 30.09.2016 for consideration of the following substantial questions of law - Keeping legal issue open for being considered at a future date and subject to the possibility of success before the Apex Court, if at all at a future date, there is any question raised against the said approval plan by some other creditors, this application requires to be allowed - The Tax Appeal, on the ground of the same having become infructuous, needs to be disposed of: High Court [para 7.4, 7.5, 13.1, 14, 15]

- Appeal disposed of: GUJARAT HIGH COURT

2023-TIOL-105-HC-AHM-CUS

Stainless Metals General Trading Fze Vs UoI

Cus - Petitioner is an unpaid seller having the title of the goods - According to him, he wishes to take back the goods - Since, his request is not being acceded to by the respondent-authority and instead with the nod of respondent No.2, 3, respondent No.4 had initiated the auction of the goods - Petitioner has, therefore, approached this Court.

Held : Considering the issue of right of the unpaid seller, Bench firstly directs the impleadment of the buyer Ghanshyan Metal Udyog, Survey No. 36/1, Kuha Road, Singarva , Ahmedabad 382430, Gujarat, India - Notice to be issued to the respondents making returnable on 20th January, 2023: High Court [para 7, 8]

- Notice issued: GUJARAT HIGH COURT