Tvl. Ganapathi Tradersh vs. The State Tax Officer

Heard Mr.Raja.Karthikeyan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.J.K.Jeyaselan, learned Government Advocate for the respondent. 2.The petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 05.07.2023 passed by the respondent for the assessment year 2019-20. 3.The impugned order precedes the notices in GST ASMT -10 dated 01.06.2022, GST DRC 01A dated 24.08.2022 and GST DRC 01 dated 10.02.2023. The impugned order also precedes three personal hearing notices, which the petitioner has not taken advantage and therefore, the respondent has passed the impugned order. The petitioner has also approached this Court after the expiry of limitation. 4.Although the writ petition is otherwise liable to be dismissed on account of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Assistant Commissioner (CT) 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis barred in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Singh the discrepancy/mismatch between the input tax credit availed by the petitioner in Form GSTR 3B and GSTR 2A. 5.The petitioner may have a case on merits and therefore, I am inclined to come to rescue the petitioner by quashing the impugned order and by remitting the case back to the respondent to pass a fresh order on merits and in accordance with law, subject to the petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax from its Electronic Cash Register. 6.The impugned order, which stands quashed, shall be treated as addendum to the show cause notice issued in DRC 01. The petitioner shall file a reply within the aforesaid period. The respondent shall thereafter pass a fresh order on merits and in accordance with law within a period of two months. Needless to state that the petitioner shall also be heard before final orders are passed. 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

mm