Tvl.Rex vs. The Deputy Commissioner (GST) (St)

Facts

The petitioner, a contractor, filed a writ petition challenging an order imposing penalty for non-filing of GST returns for the financial year 2018-2019. The petitioner contended that the impugned order was passed without issuing proper notice, with all communications made solely through the web portal, which the petitioner was not accustomed to. The petitioner also claimed to have done no business during the relevant period and that the show cause notice lacked details of unpaid tax. The respondents argued that the petitioner had an appeal remedy and had not availed the government's amnesty scheme, which was extended until August 31, 2023.

Held

The Court considered the rival submissions. While the petitioner raised concerns about the procedural fairness of the impugned orders, the Court noted the availability of an amnesty scheme. The Court disposed of the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to submit their GST returns as per Notification No. 25 of 2023, dated July 17, 2023, within a period of four weeks from the date of receiving a copy of the order. This implicitly acknowledges the petitioner's grievance regarding the non-filing of returns but provides a procedural path to rectify the situation, thereby avoiding a direct adjudication on the legality of the penalty orders at this stage. The Court did not expressly decide on the illegality or unconstitutionality of the orders but offered a practical solution.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned order imposing penalty under Section 73 of the TNGST Act, 2017, and the consequential order under Section 127 of the TNGST Act, 2017, are illegal and unconstitutional due to lack of proper notice and opportunity to be heard? (Mixed question of law and fact). Petitioner's argument: The impugned orders were passed without issuing proper notice, with all communications made only through the web portal, which the petitioner was not familiar with. The petitioner also stated they had no business during the period and the show cause notice was deficient. Respondents' argument: The petitioner has an alternative appeal remedy and failed to avail the amnesty scheme offered by the government, which was extended. The petitioner can still submit returns under the extended notification.