M/S. Sri Velavan Fireworks vs. The Assistant Commissiioner(St)-2

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Sri Velavan Fireworks, filed a writ petition challenging an assessment order dated 28.06.2024, passed by the Assistant Commissioner (ST)-2, Sivakasi, for the assessment year 2020-21. The petitioner contended that due to a lack of knowledge about GST and limited portal access, they relied on a part-time accountant who failed to inform them about the assessment proceedings. Consequently, the petitioner was unable to participate in the adjudication, leading to an ex parte order. The respondent argued that a show cause notice (DRC-01) was issued on 14.02.2024, followed by personal hearing notices on 14.02.2024, 27.03.2024, and 26.06.2024, and therefore, the order should not be interfered with. The respondent also pointed out that the petitioner has an appeal remedy under Section 107 of the GST Act.

Held

The Court noted the respondent's submission that the petitioner has an appeal remedy before the appellate Deputy Commissioner (GST Appeal), Tirunelveli, under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition, granting the petitioner liberty to approach the appellate authority. The petitioner is permitted to raise all grounds raised in the writ petition before the appellate authority. The appellate authority is directed to entertain the appeal if filed within two weeks from the receipt of the order, without reference to the period of limitation, and dispose of it in accordance with law within four months thereafter. The Court did not decide on the merits of the petitioner's challenge to the assessment order itself, as it directed the petitioner to pursue the statutory remedy.

Key Issues

1. Whether the assessment order dated 28.06.2024, passed by the respondent for the assessment year 2020-21, is illegal, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction due to the petitioner's inability to participate in the proceedings, as argued by the petitioner? The petitioner contends that their non-participation was due to reliance on a part-time accountant and lack of knowledge, leading to an ex parte order. 2. Whether the petitioner has an effective alternative remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017, as argued by the respondent? The respondent asserts that the petitioner can approach the appellate authority. The petitioner has not presented any arguments against the existence of the appeal remedy.