R. Muruganandam Vs State Tax Officer (Madras High Court)
The petitioner challenged assessment orders passed for four assessment years after show-cause notices were issued under Section 74 of the GST enactments. The petitioner did not respond to the notices, resulting in the impugned assessments. Details placed on record show that the petitioner subsequently discharged the tax liabilities for all years, either fully or partially, on various dates, including payments through DRC-03 at the time of inspection.
The petitioner submitted that the tax amounts were paid due to departmental disputes and argued that the extended limitation under Section 128-A was wrongly invoked. It was further stated that the petitioner does not dispute the tax liability and confines the challenge solely to the levy of interest and penalty. The petitioner requested that the matter be remitted to the authority to determine whether the demand should have been initiated under Section 73 instead of Section 74.
The respondent contended that interest and penalty follow automatically once the demand is confirmed, and questioned the maintainability of the writ petitions filed after the tax amounts had already been paid. However, the respondent agreed that the authority would consider the matter under Section 128-A, even though the proceedings commenced under Section 74.
