2022 (7) TMI 869 - HC - GST

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 ... Principles of natural justice - opportunity to be heard - assessment based on social media evidence - prima facie finding - remedy by way of statutory appealPrinciples of natural justice - opportunity to be heard - The Assessment Order did not violate the principles of natural justice as the petitioner was afforded opportunity to raise objections and was granted time for personal hearing but did not respond. - HELD THAT: - The Court examined the record and found that notices were issued and the petitioner sought and was granted additional time for personal hearing. The order indicates that the petitioner thereafter did not file any reply or objections within the extended time. On that basis the contention that the assessment was passed without affording an opportunity was rejected. The Court therefore concluded that there was no breach of the audi alteram partem rule warranting interference under Article 226. [Paras 7]Petitioner's challenge on grounds of denial of hearing is rejected.Assessment based on social media evidence - prima facie finding - remedy by way of statutory appeal - The Court declined to adjudicate disputed factual questions regarding reliance on Facebook/social media materials and observed that prima facie the authorities had material indicating events; factual disputes are to be decided by the Appellate Authority. - HELD THAT: - The impugned assessment was founded on information gathered from the petitioner's social media/platform used for business promotion. The Court noted the table of events and, on a prima facie reading, found it cannot be said that no events were conducted during the relevant period. Recognising that these are factual matters requiring detailed adjudication, the Court refrained from reappraising the evidence under Article 226 and dismissed the writ petition while granting liberty to the petitioner to pursue statutory appellate remedies. The Court clarified its observations are for the purpose of the order and shall not influence the Appellate Authority. [Paras 8, 9, 10]Writ petition dismissed; petitioner granted liberty to file appeal and contest factual/sufficiency issues before the Appellate Authority.Final Conclusion: Writ petition dismissed. Court found no violation of natural justice and declined to reappraise factual evidence compiled from social media, granting the petitioner liberty to pursue statutory appellate remedies; observations in the order are not to influence the Appellate Authority. 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 OrderThe 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 postingsThe 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.