The Madras High Court remands the matter for reconsideration after an appellate order was issued without hearing the petitioner and the Goods and Service Tax (GST) Department debited 37% pre-deposits from the electronic credit ledger.
An appellate order dated 28.03.2023 was challenged on the ground that the petitioner was not heard before such order was issued. The petitioner had availed of transitional Input Tax Credit (ITC). Upon proceedings being initiated in respect thereof, an order dated 01.11.2019 was issued by the 2 nd respondent herein. Such order was carried in appeal by the petitioner before the 1 st respondent. The petitioner changed its additional place of business from ‘Ayyanambakkam, Chennai-95’ to an address at ‘Halls Road, Kilpauk, Chennai-10’ while the appeal was pending. In those circumstances, the petitioner states that hearing notices were not received and the petitioner could not participate in proceedings before the appellate authority.
Mr.I.Dinesh representing the petitioner submitted that such change of address was communicated on 27.09.2023 and that the penalty of Rs.50, 000/- was paid at that juncture. He further submits that the petitioner had remitted 10% of the disputed tax demand at the time of presentation of the appeal. After the appeal was dismissed ex parte, he submits that the GST Department has made debits from the petitioner’s electronic credit ledger and that the total value of debits + amounts remitted by the petitioner as predeposit aggregate to about 37% of the disputed tax demand. In these circumstances, he makes a request that the matter be reconsidered.
Mr.C.Harsha Raj, representing the Additional Government Pleader, accepted notice for the respondents. In view of the remittance of 10% of the disputed tax demand at the time of filing the appeal and the debits made from the petitioner’s electronic credit ledger, he submits that the matter may be remanded to the appellate authority for reconsideration.
The single bench comprising Justice Senthil Kumar observed that appellate order was issued without the petitioner being heard, this is a fit case for remand to the appellate authority. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 28.03.2023 was set aside and the matter was remanded to the appellate authority for reconsideration, the writ petition was disposed of.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
