M/S.Abishaik Indane Gas Services vs. The State Tax Officer

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Abishaik Indane Gas Services, challenged an ex-parte assessment order dated 20.10.2023 passed by the State Tax Officer (first respondent) for the assessment year 2017-18 under Section 73 of the TNGST Act, 2017. The petitioner also challenged the consequential order dated 10.03.2025 passed by the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST) (second respondent) rejecting their appeal. The petitioner claimed they were unaware of the assessment proceedings due to reliance on a part-time accountant and the ill-health of the proprietrix, which led to a delay of 94 days in filing the appeal. The respondents did not contest the condonation of delay if reasonable cause was shown.

Held

The Court held that the petitioner had demonstrated reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal, primarily due to the ill-health of the proprietrix. Consequently, the Court condoned the delay of 94 days in filing the appeal before the second respondent. The order of the appellate authority (second respondent) rejecting the appeal was set aside. The Court directed the second respondent to take up the appeal on merits and in accordance with law, without reference to the period of limitation, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The Court did not explicitly rule on the merits of the initial assessment order itself, but rather focused on the procedural aspect of the appeal's rejection due to delay. The ratio decidendi is that genuine reasons like ill-health causing delay in filing an appeal should be considered for condonation, allowing the appellate authority to decide the case on its merits.

Key Issues

1. Whether the assessment order dated 20.10.2023, passed by the first respondent under Section 73 of the TNGST Act, 2017, is liable to be quashed as cryptic, non-speaking, illegal, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction, particularly in light of the petitioner's claim of not being afforded a proper opportunity of personal hearing as contemplated under Section 75(4) of the TNGST Act, 2017? 2. Whether the rejection order dated 10.03.2025, passed by the second respondent, rejecting the petitioner's appeal due to a delay of 94 days, is sustainable, considering the petitioner's submission of ill-health of the proprietrix as a reasonable cause for the delay? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that both the assessment order and the rejection of appeal were illegal and arbitrary. They argued that the assessment order was passed ex-parte without a proper opportunity for personal hearing, violating Section 75(4) of the TNGST Act, 2017. They further argued that the appeal was rejected solely on the ground of delay, which was caused by the ill-health of the proprietrix, constituting a reasonable cause. Respondents' arguments: The learned Government Advocate for the respondents fairly submitted that if the Court finds sufficient and reasonable cause for the delay, appropriate orders may be passed.