TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tax Demand Overturned: Procedural Fairness Prevails for Grocery Trader, Ensuring Opportunity to Contest GST Return Discrepancy</h1> <h3>Muthu Traders Versus The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, The Assistant Commissioner (State Tax), The Branch Manager Chennai</h3> HC Madras set aside a tax demand order due to lack of procedural fairness for a grocery trader. The court remanded the matter, requiring respondents to ... Violation of principles of natural justice - petitioner was not provided a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits - mismatch between the GSTR 3B returns of the petitioner and the auto-populated GSTR 2A - HELD THAT:- On perusal of the impugned order, it is evident that the tax liability pertains to the mismatch between the GSTR 3B returns of the petitioner and the auto-populated GSTR 2A. It is also evident that the tax demand was confirmed because the petitioner failed to reply or appear for the personal hearing. In these circumstances, albeit by putting the petitioner on terms, it is just and necessary to provide an opportunity to the petitioner to contest the tax demand on merits. The impugned order dated 10.07.2023 is set aside and the matter is remanded for reconsideration subject to the condition that the petitioner remits 10% of the disputed tax demand as agreed to within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Petition disposed off by way of remand. The High Court of Madras set aside the order dated 10.07.2023 challenged in a writ petition due to lack of opportunity for the petitioner to contest a tax demand. The petitioner, engaged in trading groceries, was unaware of proceedings leading to the order. The tax demand was related to a mismatch in GST returns. The court remanded the matter for reconsideration with a condition to remit 10% of the disputed tax demand. The respondents were directed to provide a reasonable opportunity for the petitioner to contest the tax demand within three months. The writ petition was disposed of without costs.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
