Sri Sarguru Steel vs. The State Tax Officer

Facts

The petitioner, Sri Sarguru Steel, represented by its partners, filed a writ petition before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court. The petition challenged an assessment order dated August 19, 2024, passed by the respondent, the State Tax Officer, Nilakkottai Assessment Circle. The petitioner contended that the assessment order for the period 2019-2020 was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, as they were not provided with sufficient opportunity. The respondent argued that a show cause notice was issued on January 31, 2024, followed by personal hearing notices on July 21, 2024, and July 26, 2024, and that an appeal remedy under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017, was available to the petitioner.

Held

The Court disposed of the writ petition by recording the submission of the learned Government Advocate that the petitioner has an appeal remedy before the Deputy Commissioner (GST Appeal), Madurai, under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017. The Court granted liberty to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority and raise all the grounds that were raised in the writ petition. The Court further 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 reference to the period of limitation. The appellate authority was also directed to dispose of the appeal in accordance with law within three months thereafter. No order as to costs was made. The issue regarding the violation of natural justice was not directly decided by the High Court but was remitted to the appellate authority for consideration.

Key Issues

1. Whether the assessment order dated August 19, 2024, passed by the respondent for the period 2019-2020 is liable to be quashed for gross violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically for not providing sufficient opportunity to the petitioner? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the assessment order was passed without providing sufficient opportunity, thus violating the principles of natural justice and rendering the order illegal and liable to be set aside. Respondent's Contention: The respondent contended that the assessment order was passed after issuing a show cause notice (DRC-01) on January 31, 2024, and subsequent personal hearing notices on July 21, 2024, and July 26, 2024. Therefore, there was no need to interfere with the order. The respondent also highlighted that the petitioner had an alternative statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017, before the Deputy Commissioner (GST Appeal), Madurai, which the petitioner failed to avail before approaching the High Court.