IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT
MADRAS
DATED:
25.03.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
W.P.No.7850
of 2024 and W.M.P.Nos.8800 & 8814 of 2024
Sri
Kamatchi Stores,
Represented
by its Prop.Ayyamperumal Ganesan,
No.44,
MTH road, Ambedkar Nagar,
Thirumullaivoyal,
Chennai~600 062.
GSTIN:33AIPPG4209E1ZL. ...Petitioner
Vs.
The
Deputy State Tax Officer~1,
Goods
and Services Tax,
Thirumullaivoyal
Assessment Circle,
Room
No.115, 1st floor,
Integrated
Commercial Taxes Offices Building,
No.32~Elephant
Gate Bridge Road,
Partk
Town, Chennai~600 003. ... Respondent
Prayer:
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue
a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the respondent in
GSTIN:33AIPPG4209E1ZL/2021~2022 with DRC~07 order in Ref.No.ZD330623020845K
dated 07.06.2023 and Recovery Notice Ref.No.GSTIN 33AIPPG4209E1ZL/2021~2022
dated 18.12.2023 to quash the same and to direct the respondent to cross
examine my suppliers those who have failed to file their return in GSTR 1 as
per the Invoices received and payment made by me as per the provisions of U/s
70 and to grant a reasonable opportunity for the production of records to prove
that the Input Tax Credit availed and utlized of Rs.12,04,500/~ as per the
provisions of U/s 16(2) of the TNGST Act, 2017 and CGST Act, 2017 through GSTR
3B for the Financial Year 2021~2022 which ought to be assessed by the
respondent herein.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Govarthanan
For Respondent : Mrs.K.Vasanthamala, Govt. Adv.(T)
O
R D E R
1. An
assessment order dated 07.06.2023 and the consequential recovery notices and
attachment orders are the subject of challenge.
2. The
petitioner carries on the business of trading in provisions, vegetables and the
like. A show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 06.03.2023 calling
upon the petitioner to show cause in respect of discrepancies between the GSTR
3B return and the GSTR 2B return. The petitioner did not reply thereto because
he had engaged the services of a GST consultant, who did not keep the
petitioner informed. The impugned assessment order was issued in the said facts
and circumstances without hearing the petitioner. Thereafter, a recovery notice
was issued on 18.12.2023 and a sum of about Rs.5,39,000/~ was appropriated from
the petitioner-s bank account. The present writ petition was filed in the said
facts and circumstances.
3. Learned
counsel for the petitioner invited my attention to the impugned order and
pointed out that the confirmed tax liability was Rs.10,89,028/~. As against
this sum, he submits that a sum of about Rs.5,39,000/~ was appropriated from
the petitioner-s account in the State Bank of India. He refers to the statement
of account to corroborate such contention. Since the petitioner was not heard
before issuing the impugned order, he seeks another opportunity and also points
out that the petitioner had submitted a reply on 08.03.2024.
4. Mrs.K.Vasanthamala,
learned Government Advocate, accepts notice for the respondent. By referring to
the impugned order, she points out that such order was preceded by an intimation
dated 18.05.2022 and a show cause notice dated 06.03.2023 and a personal
hearing/reminder notice dated 08.05.2023. Since several opportunities were
provided to the petitioner, she submits that no interference is called for.
5. The
documents on record include the statement of account of the petitioner in the
State Bank of India. The said statement of account indicates that debits were
made towards the tax liability on 10.01.2024 and 30.01.2024. The aggregate
value of such debits is about Rs.5,39,000/~. On perusal of the impugned
assessment order, it is evident that the tax liability is Rs.10,89,028/~ and
interest and penalty was levied in respect thereof. By taking into account the
fact that about 50% of the tax liability was recovered by making an
appropriation from the petitioner-s bank account, it is just and necessary to
provide the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. Solely for that reason,
the impugned order calls for interference.
6. Therefore,
the impugned order dated 07.06.2023 is set aside and the matter is remanded for
reconsideration. The petitioner is permitted to submit a reply to the show
cause notice within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of
this order by annexing all relevant documents. Upon receipt thereof, 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 from the date of receipt of the petitioner-s reply. In
view of the assessment order being quashed, the bank attachment stands raised.
7. writ
petition is disposed of on the above terms. There will be no order as to costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions 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.
