M/S. Deepika Traders vs. The State Tax Officer (St)

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Deepika Traders, represented by its Proprietrix Malathi Selva Prabha, filed a writ petition before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court. The petition challenged an assessment order dated 23.09.2024, issued by the respondent, The State Tax Officer (ST), Tuticorin-I Assessment Circle, for the assessment year 2018-2019. The petitioner contended that the assessment order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, as they were not provided with a sufficient opportunity to be heard. The respondent argued that a show cause notice was issued on 12.03.2024, followed by reminders, and that the petitioner had an alternative appeal remedy under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017.

Held

The Court noted the submission made by the learned Government Advocate for the respondent that the petitioner possesses an appeal remedy before the Deputy Commissioner (ST) (Appeal), Tirunelveli, under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition by granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority. The petitioner is permitted to raise all the grounds that were 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 without considering the period of limitation. The appellate authority is further directed to dispose of the appeal in accordance with law within a period of three months thereafter. No order as to costs was made.

Key Issues

1. Whether the assessment order dated 23.09.2024, passed by the respondent for the assessment year 2018-2019, is illegal and arbitrary for violating the principles of natural justice by not affording sufficient opportunity to the petitioner to be heard? (Question of law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice and procedural fairness). Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the assessment order was passed without providing them with a sufficient opportunity to present their case, thus violating the principles of natural justice, and therefore, the order should be set aside. Respondent's contention: The respondent contended that a show cause notice was issued on 12.03.2024, followed by subsequent reminders, indicating that due process was followed. They further argued that the petitioner has an available statutory appeal remedy under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017, before the Deputy Commissioner (ST) (Appeal), Tirunelveli, and that the petitioner should have availed this remedy instead of directly approaching the High Court.