Rajesh Silk Emporium Vs Deputy Assistant Commissioner and Others (Andhra Pradesh High Court)
The petitioner, a registered dealer under the GST Act engaged in the business of sale of silk sarees, challenged the assessment order dated 17.05.2025 passed for the period 2024–25. Following scrutiny of returns, the first respondent issued Form ASMT-10 dated 24.12.2024 regarding discrepancies in returns for April 2024 to November 2024, followed by a show cause notice in Form DRC-01 dated 21.03.2025 under Section 73 of the GST Act, 2017. The petitioner did not file objections or attend the personal hearing as the deponent had met with an accident. The assessment was completed in the absence of any response. Subsequently, to recover the dues, the first respondent issued a notice under Section 79(1)(c) to the petitioner’s bank, which transferred ₹1,70,568 to the department.
The petitioner contended that his relatives had informed the first respondent telephonically about the accident. Pursuant to the High Court’s order dated 24.06.2026 seeking instructions, the Assistant Government Pleader, on instructions, confirmed that such information had indeed been conveyed to the assessing officer. It was also undisputed that the entire assessed liability had already been recovered from the petitioner’s bank.
Considering these facts, the High Court held that the proper officer ought not to have proceeded with the assessment after being informed of the petitioner’s accident. The Court set aside the assessment order dated 17.05.2025, remanded the matter to the first respondent, and directed issuance of a fresh notice, receipt of the petitioner’s objections, grant of an opportunity of hearing, and passing of fresh orders. The Court further directed that the amount already recovered from the petitioner would remain subject to the outcome of the fresh assessment. The writ petition was allowed, with no order as to costs, and pending applications were closed.
