Tvl Dra Sp Vm Joint Venture vs. The State Tax Officer

Facts

The petitioner, DRA.SP.VM.Joint Venture, represented by its Partner V.Manoharan, filed a writ petition challenging the assessment order dated July 23, 2024, and a subsequent rectification order dated October 14, 2024, passed by the respondent, the State Tax Officer, Ramanathapuram Assessment Circle. These orders pertain to the tax period of 2021-22. The petitioner contended that these orders were passed without providing sufficient opportunity, violating the principles of natural justice. The respondent argued that a show cause notice (DRC-01) was issued on February 27, 2024, and that the petitioner has an alternative appeal remedy under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017, before the Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GST Appeals). The petitioner approached the High Court directly without availing this remedy.

Held

The Court noted the submission of the learned Government Advocate regarding the availability of an appeal remedy for the petitioner before the Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GST Appeals), Ramanathapuram, under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition by granting the petitioner liberty to approach the appellate authority. The Court directed that all grounds raised in the writ petition could be presented before the appellate authority. Furthermore, if the appeal is filed within two weeks from the date of receiving a copy of this order, the appellate authority is directed to entertain the appeal without considering the period of limitation and to dispose of it in accordance with the law within one month thereafter. No order as to costs was made.

Key Issues

1. Whether the assessment order and rectification order for the year 2021-22 were passed in violation of the principles of natural justice due to insufficient opportunity provided to the petitioner? (Question of law and fact, turning on principles of natural justice and procedural fairness under GST law). Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the assessment and rectification orders were passed without affording them adequate opportunity to present their case, thus violating the principles of natural justice. They sought to quash these orders and direct the respondent to redo the assessment proceedings. Respondent's contention: The respondent contended that a show cause notice was issued on February 27, 2024, and therefore, the assessment order was passed after due process. They further argued that the petitioner possesses an alternative statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017, and should have availed it instead of approaching the High Court directly.