V.Balakrishnan vs. The District Manager
Facts
The petitioner, V. Balakrishnan, an employee of a TASMAC shop under the respondent District Manager, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd. (TASMAC Ltd.), Karur District, was issued a show cause notice dated June 24, 2020. This notice followed a deficit in stock discovered during the shifting of goods due to the COVID-19 pandemic, as per a general circular from TASMAC. The notice proposed recovery of a fine and GST amount equivalent to the cost of the deficit Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) stock from the petitioner. The petitioner submitted a detailed reply on August 5, 2020. The writ petition sought to quash the show cause notice.
Held
The Court noted that the prayer was innocuous in nature. It directed the respondent to consider the reply given by the petitioner dated 05.08.2020 to the show cause notice dated 24.06.2020. The respondent was further directed to pass orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the Court's order. The Court did not decide the legality of the show cause notice itself, as the matter was disposed of at the admission stage based on the submissions of both parties. The ratio decidendi is that when a show cause notice has been issued and a reply has been filed, the authority must consider the reply on merits before passing a final order.
Key Issues
1. Whether the show cause notice dated 24.06.2020, proposing recovery of fine and GST on account of stock deficit, is legally sustainable? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the respondent should consider his reply dated 05.08.2020 to the show cause notice and pass a final order on merits. The petitioner did not explicitly challenge the legality of the notice itself but sought its consideration and a final decision. Respondent's contention: The respondent, through its Standing Counsel, agreed to consider the petitioner's reply dated 05.08.2020 on merits and decide the matter within a stipulated period.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER The prayer sought for herein is for a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the respondent office, pertaining to the impugned Notice dated 24.06.2020 passed by the respondent in his Na.Ka.Chi.Vi.No.6/204/2020 and quash. 2.Heard Mr.K.Kathiresan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.H.Arumugam, learned Standing Counsel, who takes notice for the respondents. 3.With the consent of the learned counsel on both sides, this Writ Petition is taken up for final hearing and disposed of at the admissio
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.