2024 (8) TMI 1255 - HC - GST

Judicial Review Overturns GST Assessment Order, Mandates 25% Tax Deposit and Fresh Procedural Compliance

Tvl. Annamalai Ammal Moder Rice Mill, Represented by its Proprietor S. Jeyakumaran Versus The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC), Tenkasi

HC of Madras set aside GST assessment order for 2017-18 due to petitioner's non-response to prior notices. Court remitted case back to respondent, ... Violation of principles of natural justice - petitioner was unaware of the impugned order and the notices that preceded the impugned orderdiscrepancy on account of the supply reported in GSTR 1 and GSTR 3B filed by the petitioner - petitioner is willing to comply with the reasonable conditions that the Court may impose - HELD THAT:- The Court is of the view that the petitioner may have a case on merits and therefore, the discretion is exercised partly in favour of the petitioner by setting aside the impugned order and remitting the case back to the respondent to pass fresh orders on merits and in accordance with law, subject to the petitioner depositing 25% of disputed tax to the credit of the respondent from its Electronic Cash Register within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. The impugned order, which stands quashed, shall be treated as addendum to the show cause notice that preceded the impugned order. Petition disposed off. The High Court of Madras set aside the impugned order for the assessment year 2017-18 in a GST case due to the petitioner's lack of response to preceding notices. The court remitted the case back to the respondent for fresh orders, requiring the petitioner to deposit 25% of disputed tax within 30 days. The impugned order was quashed and treated as an addendum to the show cause notice. The petitioner must reply within 30 days of receiving the order, and the respondent must issue a fresh order within two months.