Sri Ochandamman Granites vs. The State Tax Officer

Facts

The petitioner, Sri Ochandamman Granites, represented by its Proprietor O.Pandi, filed a writ petition before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court. The petitioner sought to quash an order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 27.08.2024, passed by the respondent, The State Tax Officer, Madurai Rural West Circle. The petitioner contended that due to ill-health and requiring periodic treatment, they were unable to concentrate on business activities and relied on a part-time accountant who failed to ensure statutory compliance. This led to the petitioner's inability to participate in adjudication proceedings, resulting in an ex parte order. The respondent argued that a show cause notice was issued on 22.05.2024, and the petitioner has an alternative appeal remedy under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017.

Held

The Court noted the submission by the learned Government Advocate for the respondent that the petitioner has an appeal remedy before the Deputy Commissioner, Madurai, under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority. The Court directed that all grounds raised in the writ petition can be raised in the appeal. The appellate authority was instructed to entertain the appeal if filed within two weeks from the date of receipt of the order, without insisting on the limitation period, and to dispose of the same in accordance with law within one month thereafter. No order as to costs was made. The connected miscellaneous petition was closed.

Key Issues

1. Whether the ex parte order passed by the respondent is illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, and in violation of the principles of natural justice, as contended by the petitioner? 2. Whether the petitioner, having approached the High Court directly, has an adequate alternative remedy under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017, as argued by the respondent? Petitioner's contentions: The petitioner argued that their failure to participate in the adjudication proceedings was due to bona fide reasons of ill-health and reliance on an accountant who failed in his duties, leading to an ex parte order that violated principles of natural justice. Respondent's contentions: The respondent contended that the impugned order was passed after issuing a show cause notice and that the petitioner possesses an appeal remedy under Section 107 of the GST Act, 2017, before the appellate Deputy Commissioner, Madurai, and should have availed that instead of directly approaching the High Court.