TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
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>Assessment order quashed for improper service and GSTR-3B/Form-26AS mismatch; petitioner to deposit 25% within four weeks</h1> HC set aside the impugned assessment order dated 10.10.2023, finding show-cause notices and the assessment order were not properly served on the ... Challenge to impugned order passed by the first respondent - neither the show cause notices nor the impugned order of assessment has been served on the petitioner by tender or sending it by RPAD - mismatch between GSTR-3B and Form 26AS - HELD THAT:- The petitioner shall deposit 25% of the disputed taxes as admitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The impugned order dated 10.10.2023 is set aside. Petition disposed off. ISSUES: Whether service of show cause notices and assessment order by uploading on the GST Portal without tender or sending by RPAD constitutes valid service. Whether failure to provide effective notice and opportunity to be heard violates principles of natural justice in GST assessment proceedings. Whether the assessment order can be set aside and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication subject to payment of a portion of disputed taxes. Whether attachment of bank accounts can be lifted upon compliance with payment conditions during interim relief. RULINGS / HOLDINGS: The Court held that service of show cause notices and assessment order solely by uploading on the GST Portal without tender or sending by Registered Post Acknowledgement Due (RPAD) is insufficient, rendering the petitioner unaware of the proceedings and unable to participate, thereby violating principles of natural justice. The impugned assessment order was set aside on the ground that the petitioner was denied effective notice and opportunity of hearing, which are essential in adjudication proceedings under the GST Act. The Court directed that the petitioner shall deposit 25% of the disputed taxes within a stipulated period as a condition precedent to remand the matter for fresh adjudication, treating the impugned order as a show cause notice for filing objections. It was ordered that any existing bank attachment or garnishee proceedings shall be lifted upon compliance with the payment of 25% of disputed taxes, facilitating interim relief. RATIONALE: The Court applied the principles of natural justice requiring effective service of notices and opportunity to be heard in tax adjudication proceedings under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Reliance was placed on a recent precedent where similar circumstances warranted remand of the matter subject to partial payment of disputed tax liabilities, reflecting a doctrinal approach balancing taxpayer rights and revenue protection. The Court emphasized that mere uploading on the GST Portal does not constitute valid service unless accompanied by tender or RPAD, ensuring the taxpayer's awareness and participation. The decision reflects a procedural safeguard ensuring that assessment orders are not confirmed in absence of proper notice and hearing, thereby upholding statutory and constitutional mandates.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
