Tvl V Sankar (Died) vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of CGST And Central Excise

Facts

The petitioner, represented by the legal heir of the deceased V. Sankar, filed a writ petition seeking to quash an assessment order dated 29.11.2024, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of CGST and Central Excise, Tirunelveli Division. The petitioner's primary contention was that the assessment order was erroneously passed in the name of a deceased person. The respondent revenue authority argued that a show cause notice was issued to the legal heirs, including the petitioner, who had filed a reply, and the order was passed after considering it. The respondent also pointed out that the petitioner had an alternative remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017, before the Joint Commissioner of CGST (Appeals).

Held

The Court noted the submission made by the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent that the petitioner has an appeal remedy before the Joint Commissioner of CGST (Appeals), Madurai, under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of with liberty granted 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 it without reference to the period of limitation and dispose of the same in accordance with law within four months thereafter. No order as to costs was made.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned assessment order, passed in the name of a deceased person, is illegal and liable to be quashed, as argued by the petitioner? 2. Whether the respondent's contention that the order was passed after issuing a show cause notice to the legal heirs and considering their reply negates the illegality of passing an order in the name of a deceased person? 3. Whether the availability of an alternative appellate remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017, bars the petitioner from approaching the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India? Petitioner's Argument: The assessment order is fundamentally flawed as it was issued against a deceased individual, rendering it void ab initio. The procedural steps taken thereafter, including issuing notices to legal heirs, do not cure this initial defect. Respondent's Argument: The respondent contended that the assessment proceedings were initiated by issuing a show cause notice to the legal heirs of the deceased, and the petitioner, as a legal heir, had participated in the proceedings by filing a reply. Therefore, the order was passed after due process. The respondent further argued that the petitioner ought to have availed the statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017, instead of directly approaching the High Court.