Tvl.Vasantham Recharge vs. The State Tax Officer
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Tvl.Vasantham Recharge, represented by its Proprietor, filed three writ petitions challenging orders dated 25.11.2024 passed by the State Tax Officer, Roving Squad-1, Erode. These orders pertained to the tax periods of 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20. The petitioner's primary contention was that the impugned orders were passed beyond the scope of the show cause notices previously issued. Specifically, the petitioner argued that while the show cause notices were issued under Section 73 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, the final orders invoked Section 74 of the Act and levied penalties, which were not mentioned in the show cause notices.
Held
The Court held that the impugned orders were indeed beyond the scope of the show cause notices. It noted that the show cause notices were issued under Section 73 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, but the final orders invoked Section 74 of the Act. Crucially, the Court observed that the show cause notices did not indicate any calculation of penalty, whereas the impugned orders levied penalties. This discrepancy meant that the petitioner was not afforded a proper opportunity to address the imposition of penalties. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned orders and remitted the matter back to the respondent. The respondent was directed to pass fresh orders on merits and in accordance with law, after providing the petitioner an opportunity of hearing, strictly confining the proceedings to the scope of the original show cause notice issued.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned orders, which levied penalties, were validly passed when the show cause notices were issued under Section 73 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and did not mention any penalty, and the final orders invoked Section 74 of the Act? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the impugned orders were beyond the scope of the show cause notices. They argued that the show cause notices were issued under Section 73 of the Act, but the final orders were passed under Section 74 of the Act, which is a more serious provision. Furthermore, the petitioner pointed out that the show cause notices did not mention the calculation of any penalty, yet penalties were levied in the impugned orders. Revenue's arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondent (State Tax Officer).
Sections Cited
Section 73, Section 74
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: and
Heard together (3 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
Heard Mr.A.Satheesh Murugan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.R.Suresh Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondent. _________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) Nos.2456 to 2458 of 2025
These writ petitions have been filed challenging the orders dated 25.11.2024 for the assessment years 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20. 3. The primordial contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the impugned orders herein had been passed beyond the show cause notice that had been issued to the petitioner. That apart, he would contend that even though the show cause notice has been issued under Section 73 of Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), the present impugned orders have been passed invoking Section 74 of the Act.
A perusal of the orders impugned would also show that the same are beyond the show cause notice, as no penalty has been calculated in the show cause notice. However, in the impugned orders, the penalty has been levied on the petitioner. Further as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that even though the show cause notice was issued invoking powers under 73 of the Act, the present impugned orders have been passed under Section 74 of the Act. _________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) Nos.2456 to 2458 of 2025
In view of the same, the impugned orders are set aside and the matter is remitted back to the respondent to pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner confining himself to the show cause notice issued to the petitioner.
In fine, the Writ Petitions are allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes abr To The State Tax Officer, Roving Squad-1, Erode, Office of the Joint Commissioner (State Tax), Erode. _________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) Nos.2456 to 2458 of 2025 K.KUMARESH BABU, J. abr W.P.(MD) Nos.2456 ot 2458 of 2025 Dated: 29.01.2025 _________ 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.