Mistaken statutory reference in GST notice cannot defeat remedy when the actual order was passed under the correct provision.

An inadvertent reference to Section 74 in the show cause notice and summary did not bar access to the statutory remedy where the impugned order was clarified to have been passed under Section 73 of the Tamil Nadu GST Act, 2017. The Court accepted that the petitioner should not lose the benefit of Section 128A because of the mistaken description and directed correction of the web portal record to reflect the true basis of the order.

---

---

Issues: Whether an erroneous reference to Section 74 in the show cause notice and connected summary, when the impugned order was actually passed under Section 73, prevented the petitioner from pursuing the remedy under Section 128A and justified correction of the web portal records.

Analysis: The notice and the impugned order contained conflicting references to Section 73 and Section 74 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. On instructions, the respondent clarified that the impugned order had in fact been passed under Section 73 and that the reference to Section 74 in the summary portion of the notice was inadvertent. In view of that clarification, the Court accepted that the petitioner should not be denied the statutory option under Section 128A merely because of the mistaken reference, and that the portal entries required suitable correction to reflect the actual nature of the order.

Conclusion: The petitioner was held entitled to pursue the remedy under Section 128A, and directions were issued for correction of the portal record to show that the impugned order was passed under Section 73.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition was disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to take recourse to the appropriate statutory remedy, and the respondents were directed to align the online record with the actual basis of the impugned order.

Ratio Decidendi: A mistaken statutory reference in a notice or summary cannot defeat access to a remedy where the actual order is shown to have been passed under a different provision, and the record may be corrected to reflect the true legal basis of the action.

---