Case summary: M/s.Gayathri Construction vs. Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC)
Application No: W.P.No. 15851 of 2024
Date of Order: 26.06.2024
Court Name: High Court of Judicature at Madras
Summary of Case:
M/s. Gayathri Construction, represented by its partner Mr. A. Thirugnanam, filed a writ petition challenging the assessment order dated 28.12.2023 issued by the Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC) of the Thiruvottiyur Assessment Circle. The petitioner argued that they were not given a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits as the show cause notice and other communications were only uploaded on the GST portal and not communicated through any other means.
Submission by Petitioner:
The petitioner contended that there was a mismatch between their GSTR 3B returns and Form 26AS for the financial year 2017-18, with the GST enactments having come into force on 01.07.2017. They argued that the mismatch was due to transactions from the pre-GST period (01.04.2017 to 30.06.2017) being included in Form 26AS but not in their GST returns. The petitioner agreed to remit 10% of the disputed tax demand as a condition for remand and requested an opportunity to explain the discrepancy.
Submission by Respondent:
The respondent, represented by the Additional Government Pleader, Mr. C. Harsha Raj, asserted that principles of natural justice were followed, as notices were issued in Form ASMT 10 on 05.07.2023, a show cause notice on 07.08.2023, and a personal hearing notice on 15.09.2023.
Judgement:
The court, presided by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, set aside the impugned order dated 28.12.2023 on the condition that the petitioner remits 10% of the disputed tax demand within two weeks. The court allowed the petitioner to submit a reply to the show cause notice within the same period. Upon receiving the petitioner's reply and confirmation of the payment, the respondent was directed to provide a reasonable opportunity for a personal hearing and then issue a fresh order within three months.
Conclusion:
