Tvl.Sri Ulaganayagi Amman Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer -1

Facts

The petitioner, Tvl.Sri Ulaganayagi Amman Traders, represented by its Proprietor, filed a writ petition challenging an assessment order dated 27.08.2024, passed by the respondent, The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1, Pudukkottai Assessment Circle-2. The assessment order pertains to the year 2019-2020. The petitioner contended that the assessment order was passed without providing sufficient opportunity, violating principles of natural justice. The respondent argued that a show cause notice was issued on 24.05.2024, followed by personal hearing notices on 09.07.2024, 18.07.2024, and 16.08.2024, asserting that the petitioner had adequate opportunity. The respondent also pointed out 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 has an appeal remedy before the appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST Appeals), Trichy, under Section 107 of the GST 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 the 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 the 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.

Key Issues

1. Whether the assessment order dated 27.08.2024, passed by the Deputy State Tax Officer - 1 for the year 2019-2020, is liable to be quashed for violation of the principles of natural justice due to insufficient opportunity provided to the petitioner, as contended by the petitioner? 2. Whether the petitioner has an effective alternative remedy of appeal before the appellate authority under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017, as submitted by the respondent? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the assessment order was passed without sufficient opportunity, violating the principles of natural justice, and therefore, the order is illegal and devoid of merits. The petitioner sought to quash the order and direct the respondent to redo the assessment proceedings. Respondent's Contention: The respondent contended that the assessment order was passed after issuing a show cause notice and subsequent personal hearing notices, indicating that sufficient opportunity was provided. The respondent further argued that the petitioner has an appeal remedy under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017, and should have availed it instead of directly approaching the High Court.