Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Tvl Metal Trade Incorporation Vs the Special Secretary (Madras High Court)
Appeal Number : W.P.No.3033 of 2023
Date of Judgement/Order : 06/02/2023
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Tvl Metal Trade Incorporation Vs the Special Secretary (Madras High Court)

The Hon’ble Madras High Court in the matter of Tvl Metal Trade Incorporation v. the Special Secretary, Head of the GST Council Secretariat and Ors. [W.P. No. 3033 of 2023 And W.M.P. No. 3125 of 2023 dated February 6, 2023] has held that, the State Tax Authority cannot prosecute the assessee, when the Central Tax Authority has already initiated action in respect of the very same subject matter. Further held that, to substantiate such defence, the assessee has to participate in the personal hearing/ enquiry and only then it can be ascertained whether the proceedings initiated by the Central and State Tax Authority are one and the same involving the same subject matter. Directed the assessee to appear before the Revenue Department and state all its objections.

Facts:

This Petition has been filed by Tvl Metal Trade Incorporation (“the Petitioner”) challenging summons issued by the State Tax Authority (“the Respondent”) under Section 70(1) of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“the TNGST Act”) and by the Central Tax Authority under Section 70 (1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“the CGST Act”) dated October 18, 2022 (“the Impugned Summons”).

The Petitioner challenged the Impugned Summons on the ground that both the Central Tax Authority and the Respondent do not have powers to initiate proceedings simultaneously under the CGST Act and the TNGST Act, respectively, with regard to the same subject matter. The Petitioner contended that it was he was already facing proceedings initiated by the Central Tax Authority and therefore the Respondent cannot initiate proceedings against it as per Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act. Further, it is contended that the Respondent, on a day-to-day basis, is threatening the Petitioner and calling upon it to come for personal hearing even when the Petitioner has already replied to the Summon issued by the Respondent.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031