M/S.Sita Advertisers vs. The State Tax Officer (St)

Held

The Court, recording the submission of the learned Government Advocate that the petitioner has an appeal remedy before the Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GST Appeal), Madurai, under Section 107 of the TNGST Act, 2017, disposed of the writ petition. The Court granted liberty to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority and raise all grounds raised in the writ petition. The appellate authority was directed to entertain the appeal, if filed within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, without reference to the period of limitation. The appellate authority was further directed to dispose of the appeal in accordance with law within three months thereafter. The Court did not decide on the merits of the petitioner's challenge to the assessment order or the respondent's procedural compliance, opting to relegate the parties to the statutory appellate mechanism.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. Sita Advertisers, filed a writ petition challenging an assessment order dated 15.07.2024, passed by the State Tax Officer, Virudhunagar for the assessment year 2019-20. The petitioner contended that due to a lack of knowledge about GST and limited portal access, they relied on a part-time accountant who failed to inform them about the assessment proceedings. Consequently, the petitioner was unable to participate in the adjudication process, resulting in an ex parte order. The respondent argued that a show cause notice (DRC-01) was issued on 14.03.2024, followed by personal hearing notices on 24.04.2024, 04.06.2024, and 03.07.2024, and therefore, the order was passed after due process. The respondent also pointed out that the petitioner had an alternative appeal remedy under Section 107 of the TNGST Act, 2017.

Key Issues

1. Whether the assessment order dated 15.07.2024, passed by the State Tax Officer, Virudhunagar, for the assessment year 2019-20, is liable to be quashed on the grounds of lack of opportunity and procedural irregularities, as argued by the petitioner? 2. Whether the petitioner, having failed to participate in the assessment proceedings despite issuance of notices, should be relegated to the statutory appeal remedy under Section 107 of the TNGST Act, 2017, as contended by the respondent? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that the ex parte assessment order was illegal, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction because they were not afforded a sufficient opportunity to participate in the proceedings due to reliance on their accountant and limited portal access. They sought to quash the order and direct the respondent to pass a fresh assessment order after following CBIC Circular No.183/15/2022-GST. Respondent's Argument: The respondent contended that the impugned order was passed after issuing a show cause notice and multiple personal hearing notices, thus following due procedure. They argued that the petitioner had an available appeal remedy under Section 107 of the TNGST Act, 2017, and should have availed it instead of directly approaching the High Court.