Breif Issue :

FACTS OF THE CASE

In the above case the petitioner (BA Continuum India Pvt. Ltd.) is engaged in the business of providing information technology and information technology enabled services to customers located outside India.

Due to technical error on the GSTN portal, the BA Continuum India Pvt. Ltd, in the beginning, was not able to file its replies on the web portal. Consequently, the replies were filed through several emails that denied the allegations and contentions that were mentioned in the show-cause notices. Therefore, the representative of “BA Continuum India Pvt. Ltd.” (Petitioner) personally met GST authority (respondent) and requested for personal hearing post-filing of reply

“The GST Authority while justifying the impugned orders put forth the reason that those have been passed within the framework of the GST statute by accompanying the principles of natural justice.” Impugned orders are based on the rationale and not arbitrary. Petitioner was issued a show-cause notice along with notice of being heard. However, it is worth mentioning that the petitioner had submitted written submissions through e-mail and the aforesaid submissions were taken into consideration. Adding further, the petitioner further made submissions to the adjudicating officer on the telephone. The allegation of the petitioner that personal hearing was not granted has been denied.

ISSUE OF THE CASE

Whether Telephone and E-mail replace personal hearing?