Tvl Guru Krishna Tex vs. Government Of INDIA
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Tvl.Guru Krishna Tex, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 28.06.2024 passed by the third respondent, the Authorized Officer. The impugned order pertains to the assessment year 2019-20 and relates to GSTIN:33GYBPS9362E1Z5. The petitioner sought to quash this order and requested the benefit of Notification No.7/2023 dated 31.03.2023, seeking waiver of late fees exceeding Rs.10,000/- for the specified period. The petitioner had filed their return belatedly on 07.11.2022.
Held
The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of Notification No.7/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 and Notification No.25/2023 dated 07.07.2023. The Court reasoned that the intention of the Government behind these notifications was to encourage the filing of returns and not to harass assessees who came forward to file their returns, even if belatedly, provided it was before the cut-off date mentioned in the notification. The Court found it unjust to deny the benefit to the petitioner merely because they filed the return prior to the issuance of the amnesty notifications. A harmonious reading of the notifications indicated the government's intent to promote return filing. Therefore, the impugned order was set aside, and the case was remitted back to the third respondent to pass fresh orders extending the benefit of the said notifications to the petitioner. The third respondent was directed to pass a fresh order within three months.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of Notification No.7/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 and Notification No.25/2023 dated 07.07.2023, which provides an amnesty scheme for late filing of returns and waives late fees in excess of Rs.10,000/-, despite filing the return belatedly on 07.11.2022 for the assessment year 2019-20. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that they are entitled to the benefit of the amnesty scheme as per Notification No.7/2023, relying on the Kerala High Court's decision in Anishia Chandrakanth vs. Superintendent, Central Tax and Central Excise, which held that notices for late fees for belated GSTR 9C filings before 01.04.2023 were unjust and unsustainable to the extent of collecting late fees above Rs.10,000/-. Revenue's contention: The revenue contended that the amnesty scheme is applicable only to those who failed to file returns within the stipulated time and that the petitioner's case is not covered as their time for filing expired on 31.03.2021, and they filed on 07.11.2022, which is after the expiry of the original due date but before the amnesty commencement date.
Sections Cited
Notification No.7/2023, Notification No.25/2023
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: and
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Central Government Standing Counsel for the first respondent and learned Government Advocate for the respondents 2 and 3. 2. The petitioner is before this Court against the impugned order dated 28.06.2024 passed by the third respondent for the assessment years 2019-20, 2/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis bearing reference in GSTIN:33GYBPS9362E1Z5. 3. By the impugned order, the third respondent has ordered as under: 3/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
The present Writ Petition is inspired from Notification No.7/2023- Central Tax, dated 31.03.2023. Text of the Notification reads as under: 4/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the decision of the Kerala High Court under similar circumstances in the case of Anishia Chandrakanth vs.Superintendent, Central Tax and Central Excise in W.P. (C)Nos.30644, 32069, 38545, 38547, 38891, 39203 & 40762 of 2023 reported in (2024) 04 KL CK 0099 dated 10.07.2024. 5/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on para 25 from the said decision, which reads as under:
“25. When the Government itself has waived late fee under the aforesaid tow notifications Nos.7/2023 dated 31.03.2023 and 25/2023 dated 07.07.2023 in excess of Rs.10,000/-, in case of non- filers there appears to be no justification in continuing with the notices for non payment of late fee for belated GSTR 9C, that too filed by the taxpayers before 01.04.2023, the date on which one time amnesty commences. In view of the aforesaid discussion, I am of the view that notices are unjust and unsustainable to the extent it sought to collect late fee for delay in filing GSTR 9C. However, it is made clear that the petitioners will not be entitled to claim refund of the late fee which has already paid by them over and above Rs.10,000/-”
The learned Central Government Standing Counsel for the first respondent, on the other hand, would submit that the amnesty scheme under Notification No.7/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 and Notification No. 25/2023 dated 07.07.2023 is applicable to only those who failed to file Return within a time stipulated therein, whereas in this Writ Petition, the time for filing Return expired on 31.03.2021 and that the petitioner filed Return on 07.11.2022 and therefore, the petitioner’s case is not covered by the aforesaid notification. 6/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Central Government Standing Counsel for the first respondent and learned Government Advocate for the respondents 2 and 3. 9. It is evident that the intention of the Government is not to harass the assessee, who come forward to file their Return for the assessment years mentioned in the Notification within the stipulated period. Thus, it would imply that the benefit would extend to the petitioner as well, who filed the Return although belatedly on 07.11.2022, it is before the cut off date mentioned in the above Notification.
It would be unjust to deny the benefit to the petitioner merely because the petitioner filed the Return prior to the issuance of the amnesty in Notification No.7/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 and Notification No.25/2023 dated 07.07.2023 and confine to amnesty only to those assessees who filed the Return between 01.04.2023 and 30.06.2023. A harmonious reading of the above Notification indicates that intention of the Government to encourage filing of returns. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the petitioner is entitled to the 7/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis benefit of Notification No.7/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 and Notification No.25/2023 dated 07.07.2023
Under these circumstances, the impugned order is set aside and the case is remitted back to the third respondent to pass fresh orders on merits by extending the benefit of the Notification No.7/2023-Central Tax, dated 31.03.2023. The third respondent is directed to pass a fresh order on merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. This Writ Petition is allowed, with above directions. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Index : Yes / No 29.07.2024 Internet : Yes / No apd To 1.The Assistant Commissioner, O/o. the Assistant Commissioner of (ST)-II, Commercial Taxes Building, Union Office Opposite, Tenkasi Main Road, Rajapalayam. 8/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
The Authorized Officer, O/o the Deputy State Tax Office -I, Tamilnadu Commercial Taxes Department, Rajapalayam II Assessment Circle, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar. 9/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.SARAVANAN, J.
apd
2024 10/10 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.