Case Law Details
Sun India Pharma Distributors Vs Assistant Commissioner of GST & Central Excise (Madras High Court)
In the case before the Madras High Court, the petitioner challenged an order dated 28.08.2024 passed for the tax period 2019-2020 under the GST enactments. The impugned order had confirmed the demand proposed in FORM GST ASMT-10 dated 08.03.2024 after the reply submitted by the petitioner was treated as unsatisfactory.
The Court noted that the statutory period for filing an appeal under Section 107 of the GST enactments against the impugned order had already expired. The writ petition was filed only on 09.04.2026. Despite expiry of the appeal limitation period, the petitioner submitted that it was willing to deposit 50% of the disputed tax amount confirmed by the impugned order and sought one opportunity for de novo consideration of the matter.
The learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent stated that there was no objection to such request, subject to the petitioner depositing the proposed amount.
Recording the consent of both parties, the High Court remitted the matter back to the first respondent for fresh adjudication on merits, subject to the petitioner depositing 50% of the disputed tax either in cash or through the Electronic Cash Register within thirty days from receipt of the order.
The Court further directed the petitioner to file a reply to the notice dated 08.03.2024 along with supporting documents within the same period, treating the impugned order dated 28.08.2024 as an addendum to the notice.
The Court ordered that upon compliance with these conditions, the respondent should pass a fresh order on merits and in accordance with law, preferably within three months from the date of reply or pre-deposit. The Court also directed that the petitioner must be granted an opportunity of hearing before any fresh order is passed.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
The Learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr.Sai Srujan Tayi and the Learned Junior Standing Counsel M/s.Pooja Jain, takes notice for the 1″ respondent.
2. With the consent of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior and Junior Standing Counsel for the 1″ respondent, this writ petition is being disposed of at the time of admission.
3. In this Writ Petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned Order dated 28.08.2024 passed by the 1″ respondent for the tax period 20192020.
4. By the impugned order, the demand proposed in FORM GST ASMT-10 dated 08.03.2024 was confirmed, as the reply filed by the petitioner to the said notice was deemed unsatisfactory.
5. It is noticed that the statutory limitation for filing an appeal under Section 107 of the respective GST enactments against the impugned order has already expired. The present writ petition has been filed only on 09.04.2026.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is willing to deposit 50% of the disputed tax confirmed by the impugned order, and therefore, the learned counsel seeks one opportunity for de novo The learned counsel also made an endorsement in the bundle to that effect.
7. The Learned Senior Standing Counsel for the 1″ respondent would submit that he has no objection to the same, subject to the petitioner depositing the aforementioned amount.
8. Recording the above consent of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the Learned Senior Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent, the case is remitted back to the 1st respondent to pass a fresh order on merits, subject to the petitioner depositing 50% of the disputed tax, either in cash or from the Petitioner’s Electronic Cash Register, within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
9. Within such time, the petitioner shall also file a reply to the impugned Notice dated 08.03.2024, along with the requisite documents to substantiate their case, treating the impugned Order dated 28.08.2024 as an addendum to the said notice.
10. Subject to the petitioner complying with the above stipulations, the 1st respondent shall proceed to pass fresh order on merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three (3) months of such reply / pre-deposit.
11. It is needless to state that, before passing any such order, the petitioner shall be heard.
12. The attachment of the petitioner’s bank account shall also stand automatically raised/vacated, subject to the petitioner complying with the above stipulations.
13. It is made clear that bank attachment shall be lifted, subject to the deposit of 50% of the disputed tax as ordered above and the petitioner not being in arrears of any other amount for any other tax period barring the amount demanded under the impugned order.
14. In case the petitioner fails to comply with any of the stipulations, the 1st respondent is at liberty to proceed against the petitioner to recover the tax in accordance with law as if this writ petition was dismissed in limine
15. This writ petition stands disposed of with the above directions. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.
Author Bio
