M/S. Tarun Tyres vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Tarun Tyres, represented by its Proprietrix, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 30.04.2024, issued by the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Madurai Rural (South) Assessment Circle. The petitioner stated that due to ill-health and the failure of a part-time accountant to ensure compliance, she was unable to participate in adjudication proceedings, leading to an ex parte order for the assessment year 2018-2019. The respondent contended that a show cause notice and personal hearing notices were issued, and the petitioner has a statutory appeal remedy under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017.

Held

The Court noted the submission by the learned Government Advocate that the petitioner has an appeal remedy before the Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GST Appeal), Madurai, 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 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, it shall be entertained by the appellate authority without reference to the period of limitation. The appellate authority was 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 impugned assessment order, passed ex parte for the assessment year 2018-2019, is liable to be quashed on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction and violation of statutory provisions due to the petitioner's inability to participate in adjudication proceedings owing to ill-health and accountant's failure? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that her absence from the adjudication proceedings was due to bona fide reasons of ill-health and reliance on a negligent accountant, leading to an ex parte order that should be set aside. Respondent's arguments: The respondent contended that the assessment order was passed after issuing a show cause notice and personal hearing notices, and therefore, the petitioner should have availed the statutory appeal remedy under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017, instead of directly approaching the High Court.