Intimation Notices Issued on Discrepancies in Form GST ASMT-10 without Authorization by Proper Officer: Andhra Pradesh HC directs to Issue Fresh Notices

Intimation Notices - Form GST ASMT-10 - Authorization - Authorization by Proper Officer - Andhra Pradesh High Court directs to Issue Fresh Notices - Andhra Pradesh High Court - Taxscan

In a recent ruling, the Andhra Pradesh High Court directed the authorities to issue fresh intimation notices under the approval of the proper officer.

The bench of Justice Durga Prasad Rao and Justice Venkata Jyothirmai Pratapa observed that the two intimation notices issued on discrepancies in Form GST ASMT -10 lacked the proper authorization from the proper officer.

The petitioner, M/s. Sudhakar Traders was engaged in the supply of iron and steel purchased from the resident registered taxable persons, a registered dealer under the Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (APGST).

In accordance with Rule 99(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Rules read with Section 61 of the Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, the 3rd respondent issued notices of intimation regarding the discrepancies in Form GST ASMT-10 after receiving notification from the regional vigilance & enforcement officer (second respondent). The notices demanded payment of the due tax or an explanation within fifteen days of the receipt of the notice.

The counsel of the petitioner argued that there is no provision authorizing the Director of Vigilance & Enforcement in the State to conduct an inspection of the business premises of a registered dealer under Goods and Services Tax.

The bench observed that the impugned notices in terms of Rule 99(1) of the Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Rules read with Section 61 of the Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax but not under Section 67 of the Act.

Further, the 3rd respondent who issued the impugned notices is the Deputy Commissioner (ST) but not the Chief Commissioner. Therefore, in order to issue the impugned notices, the 3rd respondent requires the authorization of the Chief Commissioner assigning the task of issuing notices under Rule 99 read with Section 61 of the Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act.

The High Court Division Bench had to determine that the two contested notices were invalid since the Chief Commissioner, the proper officer, had not given the approval.

Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates

taxscan-loader