Tvl.Mathitha Electronics Private Limited vs. Union Of INDIA
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Tvl. Mathitha Electronics Private Limited, filed a writ petition challenging a GST notification dated March 31, 2023, a Government Order dated April 5, 2023, and an order dated August 2, 2023, issued by the State Tax Officer. These orders pertained to the tax period 2017-18. The petitioner contended that due to paralysis, they were unable to participate in the proceedings that led to the impugned assessment order. The assessment order confirmed a demand against the petitioner because they had neither responded to the show cause notice nor appeared for the personal hearing. The petitioner expressed willingness to deposit 10% of the disputed tax amount as a condition for a rehearing.
Held
The Court allowed the writ petition at the admission stage. The impugned order dated August 2, 2023, passed by the 5th respondent (State Tax Officer) was set aside. The case was remitted back to the respondents for passing a fresh order. This relief was granted subject to the petitioner remitting 10% of the disputed tax within 30 days of receiving a copy of the order. The Court also directed that the impugned order, now quashed, would be treated as a corrigendum to the show cause notice. The petitioner was directed to cooperate by filing a suitable reply to the show cause notice within 30 days of receiving the order. The respondents were expected to pass a fresh order within 90 days. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned orders, including Notification No. 09/2023 - Central Tax dated 31-03-2023, G.O Ms. No. 41 and the Notification dated 05-04-2023, and the order dated 02.08.2023 by the State Tax Officer, are manifestly arbitrary, void, contrary to Section 168A of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that due to indisposition caused by paralysis, they could not participate in the proceedings, leading to an ex-parte assessment order. They sought a rehearing of the proceedings. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records no specific arguments from the respondents. However, the impugned order by the State Tax Officer was passed due to the petitioner's failure to respond to the show cause notice and appear for the personal hearing.
Sections Cited
Section 168A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R This Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of Writ of Certiorari calling for the records on the file of 1st respondent in Notification No. 09/2023 - Central Tax dated 31-03-2023 and the records on the file of the 3rd respondent in G.O Ms. No. 41 and the Notification dated 05-04-2023 issued therein and the records on the files of the 5th respondent in GSTIN _____________ Page No. 2 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 33AABCM9959J1ZZ dated 02.08.2023 relating to the Tax period 2017-18 and quash the same as manifestly arbitrary void contrary to the provision of Section168A of the Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 and violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was indisposed due to paralysis and therefore could not participate in the proceedings which have culminated in the impugned assessment order dated 02.08.2023 for the assessment year 2017-18. Having perused the impugned order passed by the 5th respondent, it is evident that petitioner has neither replied to the show cause notice nor appeared during the personal hearing. As a result of which the petitioner demand has been confirmed by the impugned order.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the submission of the petitioner is that the petitioner is willing to remit 10% of the disputed tax as a condition for rehearing the proceedings. Same stands recorded. Recording the above submission, this Writ Petition is allowed at the time of admission with the following observations: _____________ Page No. 3 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis “ (i) The impugned order is set aside and the case is remitted back to the respondents to pass a fresh order subject to the petitioner remitting 10% of the disputed tax within in a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (ii) Impugned order which stands quashed shall also be treated as a corrigendum to the show cause notice that was issued. (iii) Petitioner shall cooperate with the respondent by filing a suitable reply to the show cause notice which has culminated to the impugned order within 30 days of receipt of this order. (iv) It is expected that the respondent would pass a fresh order within a period of 90 days.” There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. 12.04.2024 Index: Yes/ No Neutral Citation: Yes / No Speaking Order / Non-Speaking Order kpr _____________ Page No. 4 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Copy To:
The Secretary, Department of Revenue, Union of India Ministry of Finance No.137, North Block, New Delhi-110 001 2 The Goods and Service Tax Council, Rep by its Chairman, Goods and Service Tax Council, Secretariat, 5th Floor, Tower II, Jeevan Bharti Building, Janpath Road, Connaught Palace, 3 The Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu Commercial Taxes and Registration Department, Secretariat, Fort St George, Chennai-600 009 4 Principal Secretary/commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Commercial Taxes Department, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai-600005 5 The State Tax Officer West Veli Street Circle, Madurai-20 _____________ Page No. 5 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.SARAVANAN
, J.
kpr W.P.(MD)No.9039 of 2024 12.04.2024 _____________ Page No. 6 of 6 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.