Tvl. Nellai Agencies vs. The Union Of INDIA

Mr.K.Asok Kumar, CGSPC takes notice for the first respondent and Mr.R.Suresh Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents 3 to 5. 2.The petitioner has challenged the impugned order passed by the fifth respondent bearing Ref.No.ZD331223265640Q dated 29.12.2023. 3.The specific case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has not been issued with a notice in Form DRC-01A. That apart, it is submitted that the petitioner has also not been issued with the personal hearing notice. On merits, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that there is a minor discrepancy in the returns that were filed. However, the input tax credit has been wrongly denied by the respondent. 4.The learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the petitioner may be given one opportunity of being heard. That apart, it is submitted that the impugned order has been passed based on the notifications issued 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis contrary to Section 168A of the CGST Act, 2017 and prayed for setting aside the impugned order. 5.I have perused the impugned order. 6.The impugned order is a non speaking order. It merely reproduces the provisions in TNGST Act, 2017 and thereafter concludes that the petitioner was liable to pay tax as demanded. Although the petitioner has not responded to the earlier notice issued, the fact remains that the impugned order is also a non speaking in nature. 7.Therefore, the impugned order is quashed and the case is remitted back to the fifth respondent to pass a fresh order on merits and in accordance with law within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The impugned order, which stands quashed, shall be treated as corrigendum to the notices issued to the petitioner earlier. The petitioner is directed to co-operate with the fifth respondent. 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

mm