Tvl Sri Lakshmi Kandhan Industries vs. The State Tax Officer Cum Commercial Tax Officer

Facts

The petitioner, Tvl. Sri Lakshmi Kandhan Industries, filed a writ petition challenging an order of assessment dated 14.11.2022 and Form GST DRC-07 dated 15.11.2022, passed by the respondent, The State Tax Officer/Commercial Tax Officer, Tiruverumbur Assessment Circle, for the assessment year 2018-2019. The petitioner contended that neither the show cause notice nor the assessment order was served personally but were uploaded on the GST portal under "Additional notices and orders." The petitioner claimed inability to access the portal and participate in the proceedings. The core issue revolved around an alleged mismatch between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A. The petitioner expressed readiness to explain the discrepancies if given an opportunity and offered to pay 25% of the disputed tax.

Held

The Court set aside the impugned orders. The petitioner was directed to deposit 25% of the disputed tax within two weeks of receiving the order. Upon compliance, the impugned assessment order would be treated as a show cause notice, and the petitioner would have four weeks to submit objections with supporting documents. The respondent was then to consider these objections and pass orders after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing. The Court reasoned that this approach would provide the petitioner with a chance to be heard, addressing the non-service issue and the alleged technical difficulties. The Court also noted the petitioner's willingness to pay a portion of the disputed tax. If the deposit or objections were not filed within the stipulated periods, the original assessment order would stand revived. The issue of the alleged mismatch between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A was not definitively decided but was to be addressed in the fresh proceedings.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned assessment order and Form GST DRC-07 are liable to be quashed on the grounds of non-service of notice and order on the petitioner, and the petitioner's inability to access the GST portal, thereby preventing participation in adjudication proceedings? (Mixed question of law and fact). Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the assessment order and notice were not properly served, as they were only uploaded to the GST portal, which the petitioner could not access. This prevented them from participating in the adjudication process. They also cited technical glitches in the GST portal and the learning curve for assessees adapting to the e-mechanism as reasons for their inability to respond. They relied on the judgment in M/s.K.Balakrishnan, Balu Cables vs. O/o. the Assistant Commissioner of GST & Central Excise. Respondent's arguments: The learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondent did not raise any serious objection to the petitioner's request for a final opportunity to present their case, subject to certain conditions.