Ramesh Agency vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)
Held
The Court held that while the petitioner failed to respond to the show cause notice, the fact that a substantial portion of the tax demand (Rs.7,62,834/-) was recovered directly from the Electronic Credit Ledger, and the petitioner's claim of being unaware of the proceedings due to parallel audits and alleged backdating, warranted interference. The Court set aside the impugned order and remitted the case back to the respondents to pass fresh orders on merits. The Court directed the respondents to re-credit 50% of the deducted amount to the petitioner's Electronic Credit Ledger to mitigate liquidity issues. The petitioner was given 45 days to file a detailed reply, and the respondents were directed to pass final orders within 45 days thereafter.
Facts
The petitioner, Ramesh Agency, challenged an order dated 20.12.2023 passed by the Assistant Commissioner (ST) under Section 73 of the TNGST Act, 2017, for the tax period 2017-18. The petitioner received a show cause notice (DRC01) on 28.09.2023, but claims to have been unaware of parallel proceedings initiated by the second respondent under Section 65 of the TNGST Act, 2017, for the same period. The petitioner also contended that the impugned order and notices were backdated. A significant portion of the demand, Rs.7,62,834/-, was deducted from the petitioner's Electronic Credit Ledger on 20.03.2024, which is when the petitioner claims to have become aware of the impugned order. The respondents argued that the petitioner had an alternate remedy under Section 107 of the TNGST Act, 2017.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned order passed under Section 73 of the TNGST Act, 2017, is liable to be quashed on the grounds of lack of awareness of parallel proceedings and alleged backdating of notices and orders? (Question of law and fact). Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that they were unaware of the Section 73 proceedings due to parallel proceedings under Section 65 of the TNGST Act, 2017, for the same tax period. They also contended that the notices and the impugned order were backdated, and they only became aware of the order after a substantial amount was deducted from their Electronic Credit Ledger. Respondents' arguments: The respondents argued that the petitioner had an alternate remedy of appeal before the Deputy Appellate Commissioner under Section 107 of the TNGST Act, 2017.
Sections Cited
Section 73, Section 65, Section 107
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25.04.2024 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.9216 to 9218 of 2024 Ramesh Agency, A Proprietary Concern, Represented by Proprietor – Ramesh.K, No.19, Pandian Complex, Anna Nagar, Madurai – 625 020. ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Madurai Rural East Assessment Circle, CT Complex, Dr.Thangaraj Salai, K.K.Nagar, Madurai – 626 020. 2.The Commercial Tax Officer / The Assistant Commissioner(ST)(FAC), Chokkikulam Assessment Circle, CT Complex, Dr.Thangaraj Salai, K.K.Nagar, Madurai – 626 020. ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent in unsigned impugned order dated 20.12.2023 uploaded under Section 73, impugned detailed proceedings in DRC 07 dated 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 20.12.2023 and impugned unsigned summary of the order in Form GST DRC 07 in reference No.ZD331223151045Z dated 20.12.2023 passed for the Tax Period
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
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.