Madras HC Conditionally Quashes GST Assessment Orders Over Rejected Appeals, Citing Natural Justice Violation [Read Order]
The Court directed that the orders would stand quashed if the petitioner deposited an additional 15% of the disputed tax within 30 days. The petitioner was also allowed to file fresh replies, and the authorities were instructed to pass fresh orders within six months
GST assessment
GST assessment
The High Court of Madras,while hearing writ petitions filed by the petitioner challenging Goods and Service Tax (GST) assessment orders, conditionally quashed the orders over rejected appeals, citing violation of principles of natural justice.
Indian Spices, petitioner-assessee, filed these writ petitions challenging the assessment orders dated 16.06.2023, issued after notices in DRC-01 and DRC-01A. These notices followed an inspection at the petitioner’s premises on 09.06.2022. The petitioner responded to the notices for AYs 2017-18 and 2019-20 to 2021-22 but did not respond for A.Y. 2022-23.
Get a Handbook on TDS Including TCS as Amended up to Finance Act 2024, Click Here
The petitioner tried to file appeals against the orders, but they were delayed by 68 days beyond the condonable period under Section 107 of the GST Act. As a result, the appeals were rejected in limine by the Appellate Commissioner on 15.11.2024 and 29.11.2024.
Having no other remedy, the petitioner approached the Court, claiming the orders lacked merit and were passed without giving an opportunity to submit supporting documents, thereby violating principles of natural justice.
The respondent counsel argued that the petitioner failed to act on time and the appeals were rightly dismissed on 15.11.2024 and 29.11.2024. The court, citing Supreme Court rulings in Singh Enterprises and Hongo India (P) Ltd., it was submitted that the delay could not be condoned. The counsel further stated that since the petitioner had not exercised the rights within the allowed time, the writ petitions were not maintainable.
Justice C. Saravanan after hearing both sides and going through the impugned orders, granted partial relief to the petitioner. It directed the petitioner to deposit an additional 15% of the disputed tax, in addition to the 10% already paid, within 30 days through the Electronic Cash Register.
If the petitioner complied, the impugned orders would stand quashed, and the petitioner had to file replies to the earlier notices, treating the impugned orders as part of the show cause notices. The first respondent was directed to pass fresh orders within six months.
If the petitioner failed to comply, the writ petitions would be treated as dismissed. The Court also directed the petitioner to submit necessary documents and cooperate in the fresh proceedings. The writ petitions were accordingly disposed of.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
