Anand Reddy Jejah vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax

Held

The Court dismissed the writ petition. The Court found no reason to interfere with the impugned order. It questioned why the petitioner could not assail the assessment order if it was indeed withdrawn after filing the GSTR-3B. The Court noted that the petitioner had not shown why the order could not be challenged earlier, especially since the GST registration was cancelled only on December 7, 2024, and the assessment order was dated January 9, 2024. Furthermore, there was nothing on record to indicate that the tax computed under the assessment order was being recovered from the petitioner through any further proceedings. In the absence of a satisfactory explanation for the delay in challenging the order and the lack of evidence of coercive recovery, the Court found no basis to intervene.

Facts

The petitioner, Anand Reddy Jejah, challenged an assessment order dated January 9, 2024, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax under Section 62 of the GGST Act for the tax period August 2023. The petitioner contended that their GST registration was cancelled on December 7, 2024, preventing them from accessing the GST portal to check proceedings. They further argued that upon filing GSTR-3B for August 2023 on April 10, 2024, they discharged a liability of Rs. 1,03,35,766, and therefore, the assessment order should be deemed withdrawn. The petitioner also stated their GST registration was revoked on July 4, 2026, after which they noticed the discrepancy. The respondents were the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax and others.

Key Issues

1. Whether the assessment order dated January 9, 2024, passed under Section 62 of the GGST Act is void, illegal, arbitrary, and violative of constitutional provisions and principles of natural justice, as contended by the petitioner? 2. Whether the petitioner has shown sufficient cause for not challenging the assessment order earlier, given that their GST registration was cancelled on December 7, 2024, and the assessment order was passed on January 9, 2024? 3. Whether the filing of GSTR-3B for August 2023 on April 10, 2024, with a discharged liability of Rs. 1,03,35,766, warrants the deeming withdrawal of the assessment order dated January 9, 2024? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the assessment order was illegal and arbitrary because their GST registration was cancelled, preventing them from accessing the portal. They also contended that filing the GSTR-3B after the assessment order, with a substantial payment, should render the assessment order withdrawn. They relied on the principle that once a return is filed and liability discharged, a best judgment assessment may not be sustainable. Revenue's Arguments: The judgment does not explicitly record arguments made by the revenue or state. However, the court's observations suggest a lack of justification for the delay in challenging the order and the absence of evidence of recovery proceedings.