Tvl. Jmj Plastics vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)

Held

The Court held that the impugned assessment order and the notifications issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act are liable to be quashed. The Court relied on a detailed order passed by the Principal Bench of the Madras High Court in M/s.Tata Play Limited vs. Union of India, which had quashed similar notifications. The reasoning in the Tata Play case, as cited by the Court, indicated that the notifications were vitiated and illegal for several reasons: they diminished the limitation period available to authorities, were based on erroneous assumptions about the scope of Supreme Court orders under Article 142, extinguished vested rights, were issued without examining relevant materials, and in the case of Notification No. 56/2023, were made prior to GST Council recommendations and based on recommendations of the GIC, which cannot substitute the GST Council. Consequently, the Court quashed the impugned assessment order and remitted the case back to the respondents for a fresh order on merits. The attachment made on the petitioner's bank account was ordered to be lifted forthwith.

Facts

The petitioner, Tvl.J.M.J.Plastics, filed a writ petition challenging an assessment order dated 19.12.2023 for the assessment year 2017-18, passed by the Assistant Commissioner(ST), Madurai Rural East Assessment Circle. The petitioner also challenged notifications issued under Section 168A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, specifically Notification No.9/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 and Notification No.56/2023-Central Tax dated 28.12.2023, and the corresponding state proceedings. The petitioner contended that these notifications and the consequential assessment order were ultra vires Section 168A of the CGST Act, retrospective, and violative of constitutional provisions. The petitioner had not replied to notices preceding the assessment order.

Key Issues

1. Whether Notification No.9/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 and Notification No.56/2023-Central Tax dated 28.12.2023, issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act, are ultra vires and illegal? 2. Whether the impugned assessment order dated 19.12.2023, passed for the assessment year 2017-18, is liable to be quashed? The petitioner argued that the notifications issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act cannot act retrospectively and are violative of Articles 14, 246A, and 265 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner relied on the principle that statutory provisions, especially those affecting vested rights, should not be given retrospective effect unless expressly stated. The respondents, represented by the Government Advocate and counsel for the Union of India, did not record specific arguments in the judgment regarding the validity of the notifications or the assessment order. However, the court noted that the petitioner had not replied to pre-assessment notices.