Tvl. Alagar Plasters vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St) (Fac)

Held

The Court held that the impugned order of assessment dated 14.03.2024, passed by the respondent for the tax period 2018-2019, was to be set aside. The reasoning was based on the petitioner's contention of non-service of notices and inability to access the GSTIN portal, which amounted to a violation of the principles of natural justice. The Court acknowledged the petitioner's willingness to deposit 25% of the disputed tax as a condition for a fresh opportunity. The ratio decidendi is that a taxpayer must be afforded a reasonable opportunity of hearing, and procedural lapses, including technical portal issues, that prevent this opportunity can lead to the setting aside of an assessment order. The Court directed the petitioner to deposit 25% of the disputed tax within two weeks. Upon compliance, the impugned order would be treated as a show cause notice, and the petitioner would have four weeks to submit objections. The respondent was directed to consider these objections and pass a fresh order after providing a personal hearing. Failure to comply with the deposit or objection filing deadlines would result in the revival of the impugned order.

Facts

The petitioner, Tvl.Alagar Plasters, represented by its Proprietor, R.Alagirisamy, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 14.03.2024 passed by the Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC), Tuticorin, for the tax period 2018-2019. The petitioner contended that neither the show cause notice nor the assessment order was served on them, and the order was uploaded to the GSTIN portal, which they were unable to access. This prevented them from participating in the adjudication proceedings. The core issue involved an alleged mismatch between GSTR-2A and GSTR-3B. The petitioner stated they could explain these discrepancies if given an opportunity and were willing to deposit 25% of the disputed tax.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned assessment order dated 14.03.2024, passed by the respondent for the tax period 2018-2019, is illegal and in gross violation of the principles of natural justice, particularly concerning the alleged non-service of notices and the inability of the petitioner to access the GSTIN portal. (Question of law and fact, concerning principles of natural justice and procedural fairness under GST Act, 2017). Petitioner's arguments: The assessment order is invalid because the petitioner was not properly served with the show cause notice and the final order, and faced technical difficulties accessing the GSTIN portal, thus being denied an opportunity to be heard. They relied on the judgment in M/s.K.Balakrishnan, Balu Cables vs. O/o. the Assistant Commissioner of GST & Central Excise. They also highlighted technical glitches in the GST portal and the learning curve for assessees. Respondent's arguments: The respondent, through the Additional Government Pleader, did not raise serious objections to the petitioner's request for a fresh opportunity.