GST assessment based on Facebook posts upheld as writ petition dismissed with liberty to appeal

The AP HC dismissed a writ petition challenging a GST assessment order based on Facebook and social media postings. The court found prima facie evidence that authorities gathered information from the petitioner's business promotion platform to assess GST, noting the petitioner appeared to have conducted events during the relevant period. The court granted liberty to approach the appellate authority without deciding on merits, clarifying that observations made were solely for dismissing the writ petition and should not influence any future appellate proceedings.

---

---

Issues Involved:
Petitioner seeks writ of Mandamus against Assessment Order under G.S.T. Act, 2017, alleging illegality, arbitrariness, and violation of natural justice.
1. Violation of principles of natural justice in passing Assessment Order.
2. Assessment based on Facebook details and social media postings.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Violation of principles of natural justice in passing Assessment Order
The Petitioner contended that the Assessment Order was passed without providing an opportunity of hearing, violating principles of natural justice. However, the Court found that the Petitioner was given the chance to raise objections and seek a personal hearing. Despite being granted additional time, the Petitioner failed to respond, indicating no violation of natural justice principles.

Issue 2: Assessment based on Facebook details and social media postings
The Petitioner argued that the Assessment Order relied solely on Facebook details and social media postings, burdening them with liability without conducting any events. The Court examined the Order and noted that information was gathered from the Petitioner's promotional platform, indicating event conduct and GST assessment. The Court presented a detailed table listing events, dates, venues, turnovers, and corresponding taxes proposed, suggesting prima facie evidence of event management during the relevant period.

The Court concluded that factual aspects regarding event conduct should be addressed by the Tribunal, not under Article 226. It dismissed the Writ Petition, granting the Petitioner the liberty to approach the Appellate Authority to present grievances on factual aspects. The Court clarified that its observations in the order should not influence the Appellate Authority's decision. No costs were awarded, and pending miscellaneous petitions were closed as a result of the judgment.

---