Tvl.Sathya Jyothis Motors Private Limited vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)

Facts

The petitioner, Tvl. Sathya Jyothis Motors Private Limited, filed a writ petition challenging an assessment order dated August 20, 2024, passed by the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Madurai, for the assessment year 2019-2020. The petitioner contended that the assessment order was passed without providing sufficient opportunity, violating principles of natural justice. The respondent revenue authority argued that a show cause notice was issued on May 22, 2024, followed by personal hearing notices on July 4, 2024, July 20, 2024, and July 30, 2024, asserting that there was no need to interfere with the order. The respondent 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 possesses an appeal remedy before the Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GST Appeal), Madurai, under Section 107 of the TNGST Act, 2017. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition, granting the petitioner liberty to approach the appellate authority. The petitioner was permitted to raise all grounds raised in the writ petition before the appellate authority. The Court further directed that if an appeal is filed within two weeks from the date of receipt of the order, the appellate authority shall entertain it without reference to the period of limitation and dispose of the same in accordance with law within two months thereafter. No order as to costs was made.

Key Issues

1. Whether the assessment order dated August 20, 2024, passed by the respondent for the assessment year 2019-2020 is illegal, without jurisdiction, and in gross violation of the Principles of Natural Justice, specifically concerning the opportunity of a personal hearing to the petitioner, as contemplated under the GST Act? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the assessment order was passed without providing sufficient opportunity, which contravenes the principles of natural justice, rendering the order liable to be set aside. Respondent's Arguments: The respondent contended that the assessment order was passed after issuing a show cause notice (DRC-01) and subsequent personal hearing notices, thus satisfying the requirements of natural justice. The respondent further argued that the petitioner has an alternative statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the TNGST Act, 2017, and should have availed it instead of directly approaching the High Court.