2024 (10) TMI 1224 - HC - GST

Tax Dispute Resolution: Petitioner Granted Partial Relief with Conditions to Address Procedural Irregularities and Compliance Requirements

Tvl. Kimpex Opticals Versus The Deputy Commissioner (ST), The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC) Chennai

HC of Madras partially allowed the petition, setting aside the appellate order due to procedural delays. The petitioner must pay an additional 5% of the ... Time Limitation - Rejection of appeal on the ground that it was filed beyond the period of limitation - mismatch between the petitioner's GSTR 3B return and the GSTR 1 statement - HELD THAT:- On examining the order in original, it is evident that the tax proposal related to a mismatch between the petitioner's GSTR 3B return and the GSTR 1 statement. Such tax proposal was confirmed because the petitioner did not reply to the show cause notice or appear at the personal hearing. In the affidavit in support of this writ petition, the petitioner has stated that he is a small dealer in optical devices and was unable to monitor the portal especially in view of his son's kidney ailment. In these facts and circumstances, albeit by putting the petitioner on terms, it is just and appropriate that the petitioner be provided an opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits. Petition is disposed of without any order as to costs by setting aside the order in original dated 24.08.2023 and remanding the matter to the 2nd respondent for reconsideration. This is subject to the petitioner remitting an additional 5% of the disputed tax demand. The High Court of Madras set aside an appellate order due to delay in filing, remanding the matter for reconsideration by the 2nd respondent. The petitioner must remit an additional 5% of the disputed tax demand within 15 days and submit a reply to the show cause notice. The 2nd respondent must provide a reasonable opportunity for the petitioner to contest the tax demand and issue a fresh order within three months.