Madras HC allows Reconsideration of Matter on Pre-Deposit Requirement Amid Inability to Participate in GST Personal Hearing [Read Order]
It was found that the petitioner's inability to respond to the show cause notice had led to the confirmation of the tax proposal
![Madras HC allows Reconsideration of Matter on Pre-Deposit Requirement Amid Inability to Participate in GST Personal Hearing [Read Order] Madras HC allows Reconsideration of Matter on Pre-Deposit Requirement Amid Inability to Participate in GST Personal Hearing [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Madras-High-Court-Madras-HC-reconsideration-GST-Personal-hearing-TAXSCAN.jpg)
In a recent ruling, the Madras High Court granted reconsideration of 10% pre-deposit requirement of a case involving petitioner's inability to participate in the GST ( Goods and Services Tax ) personal hearing due to personal reasons.
The Petitioner, Priya Tiles and Interiors asserted that various personal difficulties prevented them from responding to the show cause notice or participating in personal hearings, prompting the filing of the present writ petition. Additionally, they alleged a breach of Rule 88C of the Central Goods and Services Tax ( CGST ) Rules. However, in a bid for resolution, the petitioner agreed to remit 10% of the disputed tax demand.
Conversely, Mr. T.N.C.Kaushik, Additional Government Pleader, pointed out that the impugned order was preceded by a notice in Form ASMT- 10 and a show cause notice. He also submitted that Rule 88C is not applicable to the present case.
The bench of Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, on perusal of the order, observed that the tax proposal came from a mismatch between the petitioner's GSTR 1 statement and GSTR 3B returns. However, it found that the petitioner's inability to respond to the show cause notice had led to the confirmation of the tax proposal. Thus, the court deemed it just to provide the petitioner with an opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits, albeit subject to certain conditions.
Consequently, the court set aside the impugned order, with the condition that the petitioner remit 10% of the disputed tax demand within two weeks and file a reply to the show cause notice within the same period. Upon receipt of the petitioner's reply and confirmation of the 10% remittance, the respondent was directed to afford the petitioner a reasonable opportunity, including a personal hearing, and issue a fresh order within three months. The court disposed of the petition accordingly.
Mr.R.Ganesh Kanna appeared for the petitioner.
To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates