Amr Enterprise vs. Deputy State Tax Officer - I

Facts

The petitioner, A.M.R Enterprise, represented by its Proprietor, A.M. Rajesh Kumar, filed a writ petition before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court. The petition challenged an assessment order dated 24.04.2024, passed by the Deputy State Tax Officer – I, Kodaikanal Assessment Circle, for the Assessment Year 2018-2019. The petitioner contended that the assessment order 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 (DRC 01) was issued on 19.12.2023, and an appeal remedy under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017, was available to the petitioner.

Held

The Court noted the submission by the learned Additional Government Pleader that the petitioner has an appeal remedy before the Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GST Appeals), Dindigul, under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority. The petitioner was granted permission 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, the appellate authority shall entertain it without reference to the period of limitation and dispose of the same in accordance with law within one month thereafter. No order as to costs was made.

Key Issues

1. Whether the assessment order dated 24.04.2024, passed by the respondent for the Assessment Year 2018-2019, is liable to be quashed for violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically for not providing sufficient opportunity to the petitioner, as contended by the petitioner? 2. Whether the petitioner has an effective alternative remedy by way of appeal under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017, as argued by the respondent? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the assessment order was passed without providing sufficient opportunity, thus violating the principles of natural justice, making the order liable to be set aside. Respondent's Contention: The respondent contended that a show cause notice was issued on 19.12.2023, and therefore, the assessment order was valid. The respondent further argued that the petitioner has an alternative remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017, and should have availed it instead of approaching the High Court directly.