Ramakrishnan vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer 2
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M. Ramakrishnan, a works contractor registered under the GST Act, 2017, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated July 27, 2023, passed by the Deputy State Tax Officer-2. The respondent had issued a notice in DRC-01 on May 30, 2023, regarding discrepancies in the petitioner's returns for the period 2022-2023. The petitioner did not reply to this notice. Consequently, the respondent passed a final order under Section 73 of the TNGST Act, 2017, imposing a penalty for non-willful misstatement. The petitioner claims the notice and order were only uploaded to the common portal and not communicated physically, leading to his lack of awareness until February 2024.
Held
The Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the impugned order dated July 27, 2023. The issue was remanded back to the respondent for fresh consideration. The Court reasoned that the petitioner claimed the notice and order were not physically communicated, leading to a lack of awareness and opportunity to respond. The petitioner also asserted readiness to submit all necessary documents. The respondent expressed willingness to grant another opportunity. Citing the Gujarat High Court's precedent regarding physical communication of notices and orders until technical issues are resolved, and acknowledging the petitioner's readiness to produce documents and the respondent's inclination to provide another chance, the Court found it appropriate to grant a fresh opportunity. The petitioner was directed to appear before the respondent on March 5, 2024, with the required documents, and the respondent was directed to consider them and pass orders afresh expeditiously. No costs were imposed.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned order dated July 27, 2023, passed by the respondent is illegal and in gross violation of the principles of natural justice, specifically concerning the lack of physical communication of the notice and order to the petitioner? 2. Whether the petitioner should be granted an opportunity for a personal hearing and to submit necessary documents to re-do the assessment afresh? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner contended that the notice in DRC-01 and the impugned order were issued only through the portal and not communicated physically, making him unaware of the proceedings. He claimed to possess documents to substantiate his case and that these were available on the common portal. He relied on the Gujarat High Court's decision in Aggrawal Dyeing and Printing Works Vs. State of Gujarat, which held that until technical glitches are cured, show cause notices and subsequent orders should be issued in physical form. He also cited this Court's orders in W.P.Nos.27651, 27654 & 27657 of 2021. Respondent's Arguments: The respondent indicated willingness to provide one more opportunity if the petitioner was prepared to submit the required documents.
Sections Cited
Section 73
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R
The petitioner is a works contractor registered with the GST Act, 2017. The respondent has found certain discrepancies on the returns filed by the petitioner for the assessment year 2022-2023. Therefore, a notice was issued by the respondent in DRC 01, dated 30.05.2023. The petitioner has not replied for the same along with the necessary documents. Therefore, the final order has been passed by the respondent under Section 73 of TNGST Act, 2017 imposing penalty on the petitioner that this petitioner/tax payer has made non- willful mistatement. As against this order, dated 27.07.2023, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. 2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is having the required documents to substantiate his claim that there is no mis-statement and discrepancy and the documents 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis are also available in the common portal. However, the respondent 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis others, reported in 2022 107 GSTR 406 (Guj) and submits that in the said order, the Division Bench has held that till the technical glitches are cured, the Department shall issue the show cause notice and the subsequent orders in physical form, containing all the material particulars and informations therein to enable the dealers to respond effectively. The learned counsel has also relied on the orders passed by this Court in W.P.Nos.27651, 27654 and & 27657 of 2021, dated 04.02.2022. 4.Mr.A.Baskaran, learned Additional Government Pleader who takes notice for the respondents submits that if the petitioner is prepared to submit the required documents, they are inclined to provide one more opportunity to the petitioner. 5.This Court considered the rival submissions made and also perused the materials placed on record. 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
The petitioner is a works contractor registered with the GST Act, 2017. According to the petitioner, the respondent has imposed penalty on the petitioner for non-willful misstatement and the same was uploaded in the common portal and not communicated to the petitioner physically. The petitioner's contention is that he is having all the required documents to substantiate that there is no discrepancy and he is ready to submit the same. The learned counsel has relied on the order of the Division Bench of the Gujrat High Court, wherein, it was held that show-case notice and other related orders in physical form shall be dispatched to the dealers by RPAD, till the technical glitches are cured. Since the petitioner is ready to produce all the necessary documents, the respondent is also inclined to provide one more opportunity to the petitioner. 7.In view of the above, this writ petition is allowed. The order impugned in this writ petition is set aside and the issue is remanded back to the respondent for fresh consideration. The petitioner shall appear before the respondent on 05.03.2024 along 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis with the required documents without expecting any separate notice from the Department. The respondent shall consider the documents of the petitioner and pass orders afresh as expeditiously as possible. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. 26.02.2024 NCC:Yes/No Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes vrn To The Deputy State Tax Officer-2, Rajapalayam-1 Assessment Circle, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District. 6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis B.PUGALENDHI, J. vrn Order made in W.P(MD)No.4287 of 2024 and WMP(MD) Nos.4122 & 4123 of 2024 26.02.2024 7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Reproduced from the public record of the Madras High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.