T.Saravanan vs. The Commissioner Of CGST And Central Excise

Facts

The petitioner, T. Saravanan, filed a writ petition challenging an assessment order dated April 4, 2024, passed by the Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Madurai - II Division. The assessment order pertains to the Assessment Year 2018-2019. The petitioner contended that the assessment order was passed without providing sufficient opportunity, violating principles of natural justice. The respondent argued that a show cause notice was issued on December 22, 2023, and that the petitioner has an alternative appellate remedy under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017, before the Commissioner of GST and Central Excise (Appeals). The petitioner had approached the High Court directly without availing this remedy.

Held

The Court noted the submission by the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent that the petitioner has an available appellate remedy under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017, before the Commissioner of GST and Central Excise (Appeals), Coimbatore at Madurai. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition by granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority. The petitioner was permitted to raise all the grounds raised in the writ petition before the appellate authority. The Court directed that if an appeal is filed within two weeks from the date of receipt of the order, the appellate authority shall entertain the appeal without reference to the period of limitation and dispose of it in accordance with law within three months thereafter. No order as to costs was made.

Key Issues

1. Whether the assessment order dated 04.04.2024, passed for the Assessment Year 2018-2019, is liable to be quashed for violation of principles of natural justice due to insufficient opportunity provided to the petitioner? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the assessment order was passed without affording sufficient opportunity, thereby violating the principles of natural justice and rendering the order illegal and devoid of merits. The petitioner sought to quash the impugned order and direct the respondent to redo the assessment proceedings. Respondent's Contention: The respondent contended that a show cause notice was duly issued to the petitioner on 22.12.2023, and therefore, the assessment order was passed after due process. The respondent further submitted that the petitioner possesses an alternative statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017, before the appellate authority and that the petitioner ought to have availed this remedy instead of directly approaching the High Court.