Sri Balaji Tollways Madurai Private Limited vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer- 2

The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the impugned order exceeds the scope of the show cause notice dated 13.05.2024, which did not propose the imposition of any penalty, but the impugned order has imposed a 100% penalty, violating Section 75(7) of the GST Act. The impugned order is based on a mistaken figure of Rs.35,88,87,433.70 as the available credit, whereas the correct figure reflected in the petitioner's Form GSTR-2A is Rs.20,00,14,439/-. ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

The learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that there can be no demand for tax or input credit reversal by comparing Table 8A of Form GSTR-9 with Form GSTR-2A, as both refer to the same input tax credit available to the petitioner and not availed by it.

In support of his submissions, the learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the following judgments:- (i) S.S.Communications, Rep. by its Proprietor, Prem Ananth vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer – II, Kumbakonam [W.P.(MD)No. 22420 of 2024, dated 20.09.2024] (ii) HCL Infotech Ltd. vs. Commissioner, Commercial Tax reported in [2024] 167 taxmann.com 125 (Allahabad) (iii) SCM Silks (P.) Ltd. vs. Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC) reported in [2023] 156 taxmann.com 449 (Madras) (iv) Tvl. V. M. & Co. vs. State Tax Officer, Ramanathapuram reported in [2024] 168 taxmann.com 707 (Madras) ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Mr.J.K.Jayaselan, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent submits that the impugned assessment order has been passed after providing sufficient opportunity to the petitioner to put forth their case and therefore, there is no need to interfere with the impugned order. He further submits that the petitioner is having an appeal remedy before the appellate Deputy Commissioner (State Tax) (GST Appeal), Madurai, under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017. However, without invoking the appeal remedy, the petitioner has straightaway approached this Court.

Heard both sides.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate for the respondent and also considering the fact that the petitioner is having an appeal remedy before the appellate Deputy Commissioner (State Tax) (GST Appeal), Madurai, under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017, this writ petition is disposed of, with liberty to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority and raise all the grounds raised in this writ petition in the appeal. In the event, if any appeal is filed within a ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the appellate authority shall entertain the appeal without reference to the period of limitation and dispose of the same in accordance with law, within a period of three months thereafter. In the interregnum, the respondent shall maintain status quo prevailing as on date. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. NCC : Yes / No

2025 Index : Yes / No

2025 ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis