Tvl. Paulraj vs. The State Tax Officer / Commercial Tax Officer

Facts

The petitioner, Tvl. Paulraj, represented by its Proprietor Paulraj, filed a writ petition challenging an assessment order dated 17.02.2025, passed by the respondent, The State Tax Officer / Commercial Tax Officer, Ettayapuram Assessment Circle. The order was passed under Section 73 of the TNGST Act, 2017, for the tax period 2020-21, citing defects such as a mismatch between GSTR 3B and GSTR 1. The petitioner contended that the assessment proceedings were conducted solely by uploading the show cause notice and the order on the portal, which prevented them from utilizing the opportunity to respond. The respondent argued that portal upload constitutes valid service as per the Act and rules.

Held

The Court held that while the respondent's contention regarding portal service has merit under the Act and rules, it is also important to grant the petitioner an opportunity to present their case, especially considering the petitioner's submission of having suffered a road accident. The Court decided to allow the writ petition on specific terms. The impugned order dated 17.02.2025 was set aside, and the matter was remanded back to the respondent for fresh disposal. This decision was conditioned upon the petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax amount within four weeks. Upon deposit, the petitioner would be permitted to appear before the respondent, file a reply, submit supporting documents, and raise all factual and legal grounds. The respondent was directed to pass fresh orders in accordance with the law. The deposited amount would be subject to the final outcome and could be adjusted against other liabilities if the petitioner's plea was accepted for any of the years 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20, and 2020-21. The issue of whether the petitioner's claim for other years (2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20) would be considered was not expressly decided in this order, but the deposit was made subject to the ultimate orders for these years.

Key Issues

1. Whether the uploading of the show cause notice and the assessment order on the GST portal, without any other form of service, constitutes sufficient service of notice to the petitioner, thereby denying them a reasonable opportunity to be heard as guaranteed under Section 73 of the TNGST Act, 2017? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the entire assessment process was conducted by merely uploading documents to the portal, which did not provide them with an effective opportunity to participate in the proceedings or present their case. They claimed this method of communication was insufficient. Respondent's contention: The respondent contended that, in accordance with the provisions of the TNGST Act and the rules framed thereunder, the uploading of the show cause notice and the order on the portal is considered valid service. Therefore, the petitioner's failure to avail the opportunity was their own doing, and the writ petition was filed belatedly.