GST Dispute Resolved: Petitioner Directed to Appeal Input Tax Credit Disallowance Through Proper Appellate Channels

HC dismissed the writ petition challenging GST proceedings, finding an alternate remedy exists through appellate authority. Petitioner was directed to file an appeal within four weeks regarding Input Tax Credit disallowance and principles of natural justice violations, with the appellate authority instructed to consider the appeal without limitation constraints.

---

---

Issues involved:
Challenge to proceedings of the respondent passed in GSTIN for the year 2019-2020, eligibility of Input Tax Credit, violation of principles of natural justice, availability of alternate remedy before the appellate authority.

Eligibility of Input Tax Credit:
The petitioner challenged the proceedings of the respondent regarding the eligibility of Input Tax Credit (ITC) of Rs.5,40,478/- for the year 2019-2020. The respondent had initially cancelled the petitioner's registration for non-filing of returns, but later issued an intimation followed by a Show Cause Notice proposing to disallow the ITC claim under Section 16(4) of the TNGST Act, 2017. The petitioner filed a reply to the notice, and the respondent revoked the cancellation of registration for the period from March 2020 to January 2021. However, the petitioner contended that the respondent did not grant a mandatory personal hearing before passing the impugned order, violating principles of natural justice.

Violation of Principles of Natural Justice:
The petitioner argued that the respondent did not provide a mandatory personal hearing as prescribed under Section 75(4) of the Act before passing the order. The respondent rejected the petitioner's reply by simply stating it was "not satisfactory." The petitioner filed a Writ petition challenging the order on the ground of this violation of principles of natural justice.

Availability of Alternate Remedy:
The High Court observed that there was an effective alternate remedy available before the appellate authority, namely the Deputy Commissioner, GST Appeal, Salem. The Court held that without exercising this alternate remedy, the filing of the Writ petition was not sustainable before the Law. Therefore, the Writ petition was dismissed with liberty given to the petitioner to file an appeal before the appellate authority within four weeks to raise all the grounds mentioned in the Writ petition. The appellate authority was directed to consider the appeal and pass appropriate orders without reference to limitation. No costs were awarded, and connected Miscellaneous Petitions were closed.

---