Bajendra Prasad Panda vs. The Commissioner, GST And Cx, Commissionerate Rourkela, Sundargarh
Held
The High Court set aside the impugned order and restored the proceedings. The Adjudicating Authority was directed to fix a fresh date for hearing, with the petitioner required to be represented.
Facts
The petitioner's counsel was unable to represent him before the Adjudicating Authority due to illness and subsequent death. The petitioner had attempted to seek an adjournment and communicated this to the authority.
Key Issues
Whether the Adjudicating Authority should have granted an adjournment due to the unfortunate circumstances of the petitioner's counsel, and if the order passed ex-parte was justified.
Sections Cited
None
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER 20.11.2024
WP(C) no.26445 of 2024 and I.A. no.13747 of 2024
Mr. Panda, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, his client could not be represented to prosecute his appeal before the Adjudicating Authority inspite of having engaged learned advocate. Date of hearing was fixed on 13th June, 2024. On that day his client learnt that the engaged learned advocate had just been discharged from hospital and Order No. 02. was under advice for complete bed rest. He draws attention to communication made on 13th June, 2024 by his client seeking adjournment. Physical service of the
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Orissa High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.