2023 (8) TMI 236 - HC - GST

Tax Order Upheld: Petitioner's Non-Appearance Invalidates Hearing Claim Under TNGST Act, Statutory Appeal Option Remains

Tvl. RIDA Industries Represented by its Partner, Mr. Meer Abdul Hafiz Versus Assistant Commissioner (ST) Hosur (South) – I.

The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging a tax order under TNGST Act, 2017. Despite receiving a notice for personal hearing, the petitioner failed ... Principles of natural justice - petitioner was given fifteen days time to respond and also to come for a personal hearing - HELD THAT:- The petitioner has not asked for any personal hearing. In fact the petitioner has made a submission on merits, though without furnishing any details. The challenge to the impugned order stating that the petitioner was not given an opportunity of hearing therefore cannot be countenanced as the petitioner has given a reply but has failed to appear before the respondent in response to notice in DRC-01 issued under Rule 100 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Taxes Rules, 2017 on 26.03.2021. There is no merits in the present writ petition - this writ petition is liable to be dismissed. Issues involved:The challenge to Impugned Order u/s 61 of TNGST Act, 2017 and failure to respond to Notice of Intimation in DRC-01.Impugned Order Challenge:The petitioner challenged the Impugned Order dated 15.07.2021 u/s 61 of TNGST Act, 2017, which determined tax interest and penalty payable. The petitioner received Notice of Intimation in DRC-01, providing 15 days to respond and have a personal hearing. The petitioner acknowledged the notice but did not request a personal hearing. Instead, a submission was made on merits without details. The court held that as the petitioner failed to appear before the respondent, the challenge based on lack of hearing opportunity is not valid. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed, allowing the petitioner to file a Statutory Appeal within 30 days.Failure to Respond to Notice of Intimation:The petitioner, in response to Notice of Intimation in DRC-01, acknowledged receipt but did not request a personal hearing. Although a submission on merits was made, no details were provided. The court noted that the petitioner's failure to appear before the respondent in response to the notice undermines the challenge claiming lack of hearing opportunity. As a result, the writ petition was dismissed, with the petitioner granted the option to file a Statutory Appeal within 30 days. The Registry was directed to return a copy of the Impugned Order to facilitate the appeal process.