M/S. Tvl Vijay Steel vs. The Assistant Commissioner(St)

Held

The Court noted the submission by the learned Government Advocate that the petitioner has an appeal remedy before the appellate Deputy Commissioner (GST), Tirunelveli, under Section 107 of the TNGST Act, 2017. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition with liberty granted to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority. The petitioner was permitted to raise all grounds raised in the writ petition before the appellate authority. The Court directed that if an appeal is filed within two weeks from the date of receipt of the order, it shall be entertained by the appellate authority without reference to the period of limitation. The appellate authority was also directed to dispose of the appeal in accordance with law within three months thereafter. No order as to costs was made.

Facts

The petitioner, Tvl. Vijay Steel, represented by its proprietor, filed a writ petition challenging an assessment order dated 28.08.2024, passed by the respondent, the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Palayamkottai Assessment Circle. The assessment order pertains to the tax period 2019-2020. The petitioner contended that the assessment order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, as they were not provided with sufficient opportunity to present their case. The respondent argued that a show cause notice (DRC-01) was issued on 26.05.2024, and that the petitioner had an alternative remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the TNGST Act, 2017, before the appellate Deputy Commissioner (GST).

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned assessment order, dated 28.08.2024, passed by the respondent for the year 2019-2020, is liable to be quashed for violation of the principles of natural justice due to insufficient opportunity provided to the petitioner? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the assessment order was passed without providing them with sufficient opportunity, thus violating the principles of natural justice, making the order illegal and devoid of merits. They sought to quash the order and direct the respondent to redo the assessment proceedings. Respondent's contention: The respondent contended that a show cause notice was issued on 26.05.2024, and therefore, there was no need to interfere with the order. They further submitted that the petitioner possesses an alternative statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the TNGST Act, 2017, and that the petitioner had approached the High Court directly without availing this remedy.