2024 (10) TMI 1591 - HC - GST

Taxpayer's Challenge to GST Assessment Order Rejected Due to Lack of Procedural Irregularities Under Article 226

HC dismissed writ petition challenging GST assessment order. Petitioner failed to demonstrate procedural irregularities or violation of natural justice ... Natural justice - exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 - obligation of assessing authority under Section 5 of the CGST Act - press release dated 04.05.2018 regarding reversal of input tax credit - availability of statutory remedyNatural justice - exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 - Whether the assessment order suffers from denial of natural justice or warrants interference under Article 226 - HELD THAT: - The Court found that the petitioner was afforded opportunities at each stage: replies were filed to the intimation and show cause notice, a written synopsis was submitted, and a personal hearing was provided. The petitioner did not assert that documents submitted were ignored by the assessing officer. On these facts the High Court concluded there was no procedural infirmity or breach of natural justice that would justify exercise of writ jurisdiction. Consequently, discretionary relief under Article 226 was declined.Writ petition dismissed for lack of violation of natural justice and absence of grounds for exercise of Article 226 jurisdictionObligation of assessing authority under Section 5 of the CGST Act - press release dated 04.05.2018 regarding reversal of input tax credit - availability of statutory remedy - Whether the assessing officer failed to act in accordance with the mandate of Section 5 of the CGST Act read with the 04.05.2018 press release so as to justify quashing the assessment - HELD THAT: - The petition challenged the assessment primarily on the ground that input tax credit had been reversed automatically contrary to the press release and Section 5. The Court did not find any procedural or substantive omission amounting to failure to act in accordance with those mandates on the material before it. Rather than adjudicating the statutory merits of the contention or the precedent relied upon, the Court declined to exercise writ jurisdiction and left the petitioner free to pursue the remedy provided under the statute.Challenge to the assessment on the stated statutory ground not entertained in writ jurisdiction and petitioner permitted to pursue statutory remediesFinal Conclusion: Writ petition dismissed; no interference with the impugned assessment order as principles of natural justice were observed, and the petitioner is left to pursue the available statutory remedy. The High Court of Madras dismissed W.P.No.7096 of 2024, challenging an assessment order dated 29.12.2023 under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017. The petitioner failed to show that the GST authorities did not follow the mandate of Section 5 of the CGST Act and principles of natural justice. The petitioner was given opportunities to contest the tax demand and provide submissions, so no grounds for Article 226 jurisdiction were established. The petitioner can pursue statutory remedies.