In a recent ruling, the Madras High Court remanded the Goods and Service Tax (GST) assessment matter on pre-deposit condition due to the accountant’s failure to appear in the GST adjudication proceedings
Rajat Foods India, the petitioner had been filing monthly returns and remitting tax properly as per the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax (TNGST) Act, 2017. The petitioner received a notice from the respondents that there was a mismatch of input tax claims under Section 73(5) of the TNGST Act, which led to the demand for tax liabilities of Rs.5,89,004.
The petitioner had challenged an assessment order issued under Section 73 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax (TNGST) Act, 2017, and the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017.
Complete Supreme Court Judgment on GST from 2017 to 2024 with Free E-Book Access, Click here
The petitioner’s counsel submitted before the court that they were not given a proper opportunity to respond to the notice due to their accountant’s inability to attend the hearing.
The counsel argued that the petitioner had all the necessary documents to prove no mismatch in their input tax claim and sought an opportunity to present them
On the contrary, the respondent’s counsel submitted that they had issued the notice and given sufficient opportunity to the petitioner, but the petitioner failed to avail themselves of it.
The respondent’s counsel argued that the order was passed in compliance with the law and there was no procedural irregularity.
Complete Supreme Court Judgment on GST from 2017 to 2024 with Free E-Book Access, Click here
A single bench led by Justice N. Anand Venkatesh observed both sides’ arguments and noted that although notice was issued, the petitioner’s accountant did not attend the hearing or submit any documents due to illness.
The court considered that the petitioner had sufficient material and documents to defend himself to the effect that there was no mismatch of the input tax claim between GSTR 3B and GSTR 1.
The court referred to a similar case in WP.No.26477 of 2024 where an opportunity was provided to the petitioner under similar circumstances. To maintain consistency, the court deemed it appropriate to adopt the same approach in this case.
Therefore, the court quashed the assessment order dated 09.11.2023 and remanded the matter to the respondents for fresh consideration. The petitioner was directed to deposit 10% of the disputed tax amount within four weeks.
Complete Supreme Court Judgment on GST from 2017 to 2024 with Free E-Book Access, Click here
Failure to comply with this condition would automatically revive the earlier assessment order. The writ petition of the petitioner was allowed.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
