The Madras High Court held that the non-service of notice and order for the demand of GST is not a mere procedural requirement but tantamount to trampling the rights of taxpayers.
Mr.Adithya Reddy, the counsel for writ petitioner, M/s.Shri Tyres assailed the order has been made under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 on the grounds that no personal hearing has been granted and the procedure prescribed for making the impugned order has not been followed i.e., the impugned order was not preceded by Forms GST DRC-01 and GST DRC-01A.
The requirements of the issue of FORM GST DRC-01 and FORM GST DRC-01A have been statutorily ingrained in the rules made under the CGST Act i.e., Rule 142 of the CGST Rules, 2017.
The single bench of Justice M.Sunadar clarified that nonadherence to Rule 142 had caused prejudice to the writ petitioner’s qua impugned order and therefore it is a rule which necessarily needs to be adhered to if prejudice is to be eliminated in the case on hand. In other words, it is not a mere procedural requirement but on the facts and circumstances of this case, it becomes clear that it is tantamount to trampling the rights of the writ petitioner.
“As sequitur, the respondent shall commence proceedings afresh i.e., de-novo and complete the exercise by adhering to the requirements more particularly requirements under Rule 142 of CGST Rules, 2017,” the court ordered while quashing impugned order on the ground Rule 142 of CGST Act, 2017, though obviously it is made clear that no view or opinion on the merits of the matter has been expressed in the instant order.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
