Golden Industries vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer 1

Facts

The petitioner, Golden Industries, represented by its Proprietor, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 14.03.2025 passed by the first respondent, the Deputy State Tax Officer-1. This order, passed under Section 73 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, pertains to the assessment year 2019-2020 and relates to GSTIN 33BLQPS3742D1ZZ. The petitioner contended that the order was passed without proper scrutiny of submitted records and violated principles of natural justice. The respondents argued that the petitioner failed to upload all requested documents, including E-Way Bills, invoices, TDS details, and bank statements. They also pointed out that the petitioner had an alternative appeal remedy under Section 107 of the TNGST Act, 2017.

Held

The Court noted the submission by the learned Government Advocate that the petitioner has an appeal remedy before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST) GST Appeal, Tiruchirappalli, under Section 107 of the TNGST Act, 2017. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of with liberty granted to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority. The petitioner was permitted to raise all grounds raised in the writ petition before the appellate authority. The Court directed that if an appeal is filed within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the appellate authority shall entertain the appeal and dispose of it in accordance with law within three months thereafter. No order as to costs was made. The connected miscellaneous petition was closed.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned rectification rejection order dated 14.03.2025, passed by the first respondent under Section 73 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, is liable to be quashed for violating the principles of natural justice due to lack of proper scrutiny of records? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the order was based on a finding that they failed to produce E-Way Bills and invoices, but this finding was reached without a proper scrutiny of the records they had submitted. This, they contended, violated the principles of natural justice. Respondents' arguments: The respondents argued that the petitioner had not fully uploaded the requested documents, such as E-Way Bill copies, TDS invoice breakup, 26AS statement, and bank statements. They further contended that the petitioner had an available statutory remedy of appeal before the Deputy Commissioner (ST) GST Appeal under Section 107 of the TNGST Act, 2017, and should have availed that instead of directly approaching the High Court.