Cost of Rs. 5 Lakh to Be Imposed on Assessee for Filing Writ Against SCN With All Material Particulars

  • Blog|News|GST & Customs|
  • 2 Min Read
  • By Chetan Kulasri
  • |
  • Last Updated on 21 October, 2024

Filing Writ Against SCN

Case Details: Viswaat Chemicals Ltd. vs. Union of india - [2024] 167 taxmann.com 450 (Bombay)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

  • M.S. Sonak & Jitendra Jain, JJ.
  • Vishal AgrawalAbhishek Deodhar, & Rishabh Jain for the Petitioner.
  • Jitendra B. MishraAshutosh MishraMs Sangeeta YadavRupesh DubeySatyaprakash SharmaMs Megha Bajoria for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner received a show cause notice. It challenged the notice and contended that the impugned notice was vague and it was deprived of an effective opportunity to respond to the notice. It was also contended that there was a violation of principles of natural justice and the impugned order was a nullity since the notice was issued without jurisdiction.

High Court Held

The Honorable High Court noted that the impugned show cause notice referred to the intelligence inputs based upon which the notice was issued. There was detailed reference to several factual aspects and the legal provisions, notifications and circulars proposed to be relied upon. There was also a reference to some Supreme Court decisions on the subject.

Moreover, the notice contained detailed grounds with full particulars and the answers on behalf of the petitioner have also been incorporated in the impugned notice. Thus, the Court held that the charge about the impugned notice being vague or bereft of any material particulars was frivolous and raised only to avoid resorting to the alternate remedial appeal available to the petitioner.

List of Cases Referred to

  • Whirlpool Corporation v. Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai and others (1998) 8 SCC 1 (para 11)
  • Special Director and Another v. Mohd. Ghulam Ghouse and another (2004) 3 SCC 440 (para 14)
  • Union of India and others v. Coastal Container Transporters Association and others (2019) 20 SCC 446 (para 15)
  • Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. v. Chairman CBDT and another (2004) 6 SCC 431 (para 16)
  • Malladi Drugs and Pharma Limited v. Union of India and another (2020) 12 SCC 808 (para 17).

Disclaimer: The content/information published on the website is only for general information of the user and shall not be construed as legal advice. While the Taxmann has exercised reasonable efforts to ensure the veracity of information/content published, Taxmann shall be under no liability in any manner whatsoever for incorrect information, if any.

Leave a Reply

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

Everything on Tax and Corporate Laws of India

To subscribe to our weekly newsletter please log in/register on Taxmann.com