M/S.Sree Krishna Coconut Product Company vs. The State Tax Officer
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Before: and
This writ petition challenges the impugned order dated 19.08.2024 which is an assessment order passed under Section 73 of the TNGST Act, 2017. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Standing Counsel for the respondent.
By the impugned order, the assessment was made ex-parte because the petitioner did not utilise the opportunities provided. The discrepancies and grounds on which the assessment order was issued, the dealer’s explanation on merits, and the reasons for not participating in the assessment proceedings are summarised briefly and presented in a table below: 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Discrepancies found/Grounds on which the assessment is passed Explanation offered by the Assessee on merits Explanation for not availing the opportunity i)Reconciliation of GSTR-01
with GSTR 3B showed difference ii) Reconciliation of e-way bill turnover form GSTR 01 showed difference iii) Penalty under Section 73 and interest
under Section 50 of the GST Act As far as the allegation of difference between the outward supplies declared in form GSTR 01 to that of form GSTR 3B return, he submits that whatever outward supply he had effected has been reported by him. As far as the allegation of difference between the outward supplies declared in e-way bill to that of form GSTR 01, he submits that to his knowledge he had declared the outward supply effected by him during the above year In the absence of any excess claim or wrong claim the question of levy of interest under Section 50 and penalty under Section 73 of the GST Act does not arise to the facts of this case. The part time accountant failed to notice the fact of issuing of the proceedings. The respondent had only chosen to upload all the communication, summons, notices, and orders only on the web portal. Because of the above reasons, the petitioner was not able to access the web portal which resulted in the issuance of Ex parte impugned order
Considering the nature of the discrepancies noted, the explanation provided by the assessee and the reason given before this Court for not availing the opportunity, I believe that an opportunity can be granted to the assessee to present their submissions and produce the relevant supporting documents before the respondent assessing officer. This Court has been extending such 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis opportunities on equitable grounds; however, under appropriate conditions. Therefore, an opportunity is granted to the petitioner assessee on the condition of depositing 25% of the disputed tax amount.
In view thereof, this Writ Petition is allowed on the following terms: (i) Within four weeks from the date of receipt of a web copy of the order, the petitioner shall deposit 25% of the disputed tax amount with the respondent, without waiting for a certified copy of the order; (ii) Upon such deposit, the impugned order dated 19.08.2024 shall stand set aside, and the matter shall stand remanded back to the file of the respondent; (iii) The assessee shall appear before the respondent without fail and submit their reply and documents in support of their claim, and it is for the respondent to consider the matter afresh and pass orders in accordance with law; (iv) Since the impugned order of assessment is set aside, any attachment of the bank account made pursuant to the impugned order shall stand raised; 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis (v) No costs. Consequently the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
2026 NCC : Yes/No sji TO The State Tax Officer, Vedasandur Assessment Circle, Commercial Tax Building, Dindigul. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J. sji ORDER IN WP(MD) No.17921 of 2026 Date : 25/06/2026 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Reproduced from the public record of the Madras High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.