Tvl. Sam Enterprises v. State Tax Officer,
BACKGROUND
The petitioner, a proprietary firm, was subjected to GST proceedings for the tax period 2019-20 by the State Tax Officer, Arumbakkam Assessment Circle, Chennai. The respondent-authority uploaded all notices and communications solely on the GST online portal. The petitioner remained unaware of these notices and consequently could not file a reply within the stipulated time. Taking advantage of this lapse, the respondent passed a demand order dated 27.08.2024 under Section 73, along with a summary in Form GST DRC-07, without granting any opportunity of personal hearing. Further, the tax authority had already recovered more than 80% of the total disputed tax demand of Rs. 2,12,546/- from the petitioner's bank account through attachment. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madras High Court, challenging the impugned order on twin grounds: (i) contravention of the CGST/TNGST Act, 2017, and (ii) violation of principles of natural justice.
COURT OBSERVATIONS (Verbatim)
Para 7: "In the cases on hand, it is clear that no opportunity of personal hearing was provided to the petitioner prior to the passing of impugned order. Hence, this Court is of the view that the impugned order was passed in violation of principles of natural justice since it is just and necessary to provide an opportunity to the petitioner to establish their case on merits."
FINAL VERDICT
The impugned order dated 27.08.2024 was set aside and the matter was remanded to the State Tax Officer for fresh consideration. The petitioner was directed to file reply/objections with supporting documents within three weeks from receipt of the order. The respondent was directed to thereafter issue a 14-day clear notice fixing a personal hearing date and pass appropriate orders on merits, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. No costs were awarded.
👍 In favour of the Assessee
Other Case Law
Netgear Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner CGST, Karol Bagh Division, GST Delhi North & Another
Validity of Show Cause Notice issued under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017 for recovery of refund already sanctioned pursuant to an Appellate Order and High Court direction, without alleging fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts
BackgroundNetgear Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. had filed a refund application cl...
Read MoreA.R. Steels vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner STL & Others
Whether a writ petition challenging a GST assessment order is maintainable when filed with inordinate and unexplained delay, on the ground that the petitioner could not access the GST portal due to cancellation of registration.
BACKGROUNDThe petitioner, a trader in iron and iron scrap, had its GST registrat...
Read MoreFlorida Solvent Private Limited v. Superintendent, CGST & Central Excise & Ors.
Cancellation of GST registration under Sections 29(2)(a), 29(2)(e) of CGST Act, 2017 read with Rule 21(e) of CGST Rules, 2017 on alleged fraudulent ITC. Issue relating to denial of Input Tax Credit under Section 16(2)(c) of CGST Act, 2017 and validity of
Case Facts:The petitioner challenged the Order-in-Original dated 04.12.2025 canc...
Read More