Tvl Sri Easwari Traders vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)

Facts

The petitioner, Tvl. Sri Easwari Traders, filed two writ petitions before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court challenging assessment orders passed by the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Palani, for the tax periods 2017-2018 and 2018-2019. The petitioner contended that these orders were passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically by not providing sufficient opportunity for a personal hearing. The respondent revenue authority argued that show cause notices in DRC 01 were issued on 06.03.2023, and that the petitioner had an alternative appellate remedy under Section 107 of the TNGST Act, 2017, before the Deputy Commissioner (GST) (Appeals). The petitioner had approached the High Court directly without exhausting this remedy.

Held

The Court acknowledged the submission by the learned Additional Government Pleader that the petitioner possesses an appeal remedy before the Deputy Commissioner (GST) (Appeals), Madurai, under Section 107 of the TNGST Act, 2017. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petitions with liberty granted to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority. The petitioner was permitted to raise all grounds raised in the writ petitions before the appellate authority. The Court directed that if an appeal is filed within one month from the date of receipt of the order, the appellate authority shall entertain it without insisting on the limitation period. The appellate authority was further directed to dispose of the appeal in accordance with law within two months thereafter. No order as to costs was made.

Key Issues

1. Whether the assessment orders for the years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019, passed by the respondent, are liable to be quashed for being in gross violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically for not providing a sufficient opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, as contemplated under the provisions of the GST Act? Petitioner's contention: The assessment orders were passed without providing sufficient opportunity to the petitioner, violating the principles of natural justice, and thus are liable to be set aside. Respondent's contention: Show cause notices were issued to the petitioner, and the petitioner has an alternative remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the TNGST Act, 2017. Therefore, the writ petitions should not be entertained.