M/S Niagara Metals INDIA ( LTD) vs. Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax Division Ludhiana
Held
The Court held that the order dated 08.06.2018 (Annexure P-7) passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana, was indeed non-speaking and lacked the necessary reasons for summoning the petitioner. Both parties were in agreement that the matter should be remanded back for passing a fresh order. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside. The Court directed the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana, to pass a fresh speaking order, assigning reasons in accordance with the law. The petition was disposed of in these terms.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s Niagara Metals India (Ltd), challenged an order dated 08.06.2018 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana. The petitioner argued that the order was non-speaking and lacked any reasons for summoning them. The respondent is the Assistant Commissioner, Central Goods and Services Tax Division, Ludhiana. The parties were in agreement that the matter should be remanded for a fresh order to be passed with proper reasoning. The Chief Judicial Magistrate's order, Annexure P-7, is the subject of the challenge.
Key Issues
1. Whether the order dated 08.06.2018 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana, is a non-speaking order and lacks proper reasoning, thereby violating principles of natural justice? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the order under challenge is non-speaking and was passed without assigning any reasons, making it liable to be set aside. Respondent's contention: The respondent did not dispute the petitioner's assertion that the order was non-speaking and agreed that the matter should be remanded for passing a fresh order with reasons.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
130 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-44364-2022 DECIDED ON: 29th SEPTEMBER, 2022 M/S NIAGARA METALS INDIA ( LTD) .....PETITIONER VERSUS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DIVISION LUDHIANA .....RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL.
Present: Mr. Sangram S. Saron, Advocate with Ms. Shubreet Kaur, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Sunish Bindlish, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Prashant Rana, Advocate for the respondent. *** SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)
Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the order dated 08.06.2018 (Annexure P-7) passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana, which is according him absolutely non-speaking and without assigning any reasons.
There is no dispute that the order under challenge is non- speaking and no reasons have been put forth for summoning the petitioner.
Parties are ad-idem that the matter should be remanded back for passing a fresh order by assigning reasons, in accordance with law.
In view of above, the impugned order dated 08.06.2018 (Annexure P-7) is set aside and learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana is directed to pass a fresh speaking order giving rea
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 Punjab and Haryana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.