IN
THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED:
26.03.2024
CORAM
THE
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
W.P.No.7855
of 2024
and
W.M.P.Nos.8808 & 8809 of 2024
Rice
Lake Weighing Systems India Ltd.,
Represented
by Finance Manager Karthikeyan.KP
Plot
No.A/27/1, SIPCOT Industrial Growth Centre,
Mathur
Village & Post Oragadam, Sriperumbudur Taluk,
Kancheepuram
District ~ 602 105. ... Petitioner
~vs~
The
State Tax Officer
Oragadam
Assessment Circle,
Nasarath
Pattei, Poondhamallee,
Chennai
600 123. ... Respondent
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the
records in of Order bearing No. GSTIN: 33AAJCS7011H1ZJ/2017~18 dated 19.12.2023
passed by the respondent and quash the same as arbitrary and illegal.
For Petitioner : Mr.Joseph Prabakar
For Respondent :
Mr.T.N.C.Kaushik, AGP (T)
**********
ORDER
1. An
assessment order dated 19.12.2023 is challenged primarily on the ground that a
personal hearing was not provided by the petitioner.
2. The
petitioner is engaged in the business of manufacture of weighing machinery
and accessories. Upon the petitioner filing returns in respect
of the assessment period 2017~18, the respondent issued a show cause notice
dated 27.09.2023 in respect of about 17 defects which had been pointed out in
course of audit. By reply dated
27.10.2023, the petitioner responded to each alleged defect and also enclosed
about 10 annexures. The impugned order
was issued thereafter on 19.12.2023.
3. Learned
counsel for the petitioner referred to the reply dated 27.10.2023 and pointed
out that each defect was responded to.
He further submitted that documents to corroborate the statements in the
reply were annexed as is evident from the last page of such reply which enumerates
such annexures. He further submits that
the impugned order is vitiated because the mandatory prescription under
applicable GST statutes was contravened by not providing a personal hearing.
4. Mr.T.N.C.Kaushik,
learned Additional Government Pleader, accepts notice for the respondent. He points out that the impugned order takes
into account the petitioner-s reply in respect of each defect dealt with
therein.
5. As
per sub~section (4) of Section 75 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act,
2017, a personal hearing is mandatory either if requested for or if an order
adverse to the tax payer is proposed to be issued. The documents on record include the reply of
the petitioner. Such reply deals with
each alleged defect. The petitioner also
enclosed 10 annexures in support of such reply.
In these circumstances, the denial of a personal hearing undoubtedly
contravenes the statutory prescription in such regard. Hence, the impugned order is not sustainable.
6. Therefore,
the impugned order dated 19.12.2023 is quashed and the matter is remanded for
re~consideration. The respondent is
directed to provide a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, including a
personal hearing, and thereafter issue a fresh order within a period of two
months.
7. W.P.No.7855
of 2024 is disposed of on the above terms.
No costs. Consequently,
W.M.P.Nos.8808 and 8809 of 2024 are closed.
Disclaimer:
All the Information is based on the notification, circular and order issued by
the Govt. authority and judgement
delivered by the court or the authority information is strictly for educational
purposes and on the basis of our best
understanding of laws & not binding on anyone.
