Tvl. Nazvin Lubes vs. State Tax Officer
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Tvl.Nazvin Lubes, represented by its Proprietor, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 28.12.2023 passed by the respondent, The State Tax Officer, for the assessment year 2017-18. The petitioner contended that the respondent failed to issue intimations in GSTR ASMT-10 or GST DRC 01A. Furthermore, the petitioner admitted to failing to appear for a notice issued on 16.09.2023 in GST DRC 01 and for a personal hearing due to illness. The respondent agreed to dispense with the filing of a counter affidavit.
Held
The Court held that the impugned order dated 28.12.2023 should be set aside and the case remitted back to the respondent for fresh consideration. The reasoning was based on the petitioner's submission that mandatory intimations were not provided and that the petitioner was unable to participate in the proceedings due to illness, thereby not being afforded a proper opportunity to present their case. The Court directed the petitioner to deposit 10% of the disputed tax as a condition for the remand. The impugned order was to be treated as an addendum to the show cause notice, and the petitioner was granted 30 days to file a reply. The respondent was directed to consider the reply and pass fresh orders within three months, ensuring the petitioner is heard before passing the order. No specific issue was left undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned order dated 28.12.2023, passed by the respondent for the assessment year 2017-18, is liable to be quashed on the grounds of procedural irregularities, specifically the non-issuance of mandatory intimations and the denial of an opportunity to file objections. (Question of law and fact, turning on principles of natural justice and relevant GST provisions). Petitioner's arguments: The respondent failed to issue GSTR ASMT-10 and GST DRC 01A. The petitioner was unable to respond to notices and attend personal hearings due to illness, thus being denied a fair opportunity to present their case. The impugned order should be set aside, and the matter should be remanded for fresh consideration after allowing the petitioner to file objections. Respondent's arguments: The respondent consented to the disposal of the writ petition at the admission stage without filing a counter affidavit, implying an acceptance of the petitioner's plea for a fresh opportunity.
Sections Cited
GST DRC 01, GST DRC 01A, GSTR ASMT-10
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: and
This Writ Petition is disposed of at the time of admission with the consent of the learned counsel for the respondent after dispensing with the requirement of filing counter.
In this Writ Petition, the petitioner is challenged the impugned order dated 28.12.2023 bearing reference No.GSTIN:33AGNPJ4180F1ZH/2017-18 passed by the respondent for the assessment year 2017-18. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent neither issued intimation in GSTR ASMT-10 nor in GST DRC 01A to the petitioner.
It is submitted that the petitioner also failed to appear to the notice, which was issued on 16.09.2023 in GST DRC 01 and failed to respond as the petitioner was unwell and therefore, the petitioner also failed to appear for personal hearing.
Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis inclined to set aside the impugned order and the case is remitted back to the respondent to pass fresh orders on merits and in accordance with law subject to the petitioner depositing 10% of the disputed tax to the credit of the respondent.
The impugned order, which stands quashed, shall be treated as addendum to the show cause notice that preceded the impugned order. The petitioner is at liberty to file a reply to the show cause notice within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
The respondent is directed to consider the same and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of three months thereafter. Needless to state, the petitioner shall be heard before passing the order. This Writ Peititon is disposed of, with above directions. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
Index : Yes / No 12.06.2024 Internet : Yes / No apd 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis To The State Tax Officer, Thiruchendur Assessment Circle, Thiruchendur. 4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.SARAVANAN, J.
apd
2024 5/5 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.