D. Vilji vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Before: and
The petitioner has filed this writ petition for quashing the impugned assessment proceedings on the file of the Respondent in Form GST DRC-07 in Reference No. ZD330225228389C dated 22-02-2025 as without juri iction and barred by limitation. 2.The petitioner is the wife of the deceased dealer, Chellakannnadar Krishnappa, who died on 02.06.2021 due to COVID-19. A notice was issued in the name of the deceased, addressed to the business premises. It is the specific case of the petitioner that the petitioner filed her reply to the aforesaid notice. However, it has not been considered and thus, an ex parte order came to be passed on 22.02.2025. 3.On merits, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the registration was cancelled on 03.01.2022 itself and subsequently, show cause notices have been issued stating the incorrect tax liability for the financial year 2018-19, for which, the petitioner submitted reply to the said notices. However, without considering the said reply, the impugned 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis order has been passed. The learned counsel for the petitioner would also submit that the petitioner's late husband also had un-utilized input tax credit, which also could be setoff against the tax liability and therefore, he submits that an opportunity be given to the petitioner to engage a counsel to represent the case. 4.The learned Government Advocate for the respondent would submit that the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. In any event, it is submitted that the petitioner has an alternate remedy under Section 107 of the TNGST Act, 2017 and therefore, she should be asked to workout her remedy before the appellate Authority. That apart, it is submitted that there is no dispute with the tax liability. It is submitted that the petitioner's late husband had belatedly paid the tax and therefore, the impugned order is merely a consequential order on account of the delayed payment. 5.I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate for the respondent. 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
In my view, this is a fit case for exercising the discretion in favour of the petitioner by quashing the impugned order and remitting the case back to the respondent to pass fresh orders on merits and in accordance with law, by considering the reply submitted by the petitioner, within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that the petitioner shall co-operate with the respondent in the de nova proceeding, failing which the respondent is at liberty to pass orders based on the materials available. 7.With the above liberty, the Writ Petition stands allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 23.04.2025 Index : Yes / No NCC : Yes / No Sm 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis To The Deputy State Tax Officer, Nagercoil (Rural), Mead Street, Nagercoil. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J.
Sm W.P.(MD) No.10965 of 2025 23.04.2025 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.