Case Law Details
Abishek Suppliers Vs Commercial Tax Officer (Madras High Court)
Introduction: In a recent ruling, the Madras High Court addressed the issue of a mismatch between GSTR 1 statements and GSTR 3B returns in the case of Abishek Suppliers vs. Commercial Tax Officer. The court’s decision highlighted procedural lapses and underscored the importance of adhering to principles of natural justice. The court granted Abishek Suppliers an opportunity to be heard on the merits of the case, conditional upon a 10% pre-deposit of the disputed tax demand.
Background and Case Details: Abishek Suppliers faced an adverse order dated April 16, 2024, after failing to upload a reply to a show cause notice issued on December 14, 2023. The notice demanded an explanation for discrepancies between the GSTR 1 statement and GSTR 3B return. The petitioner, represented by their learned counsel, argued that the mismatch occurred due to an inadvertent error: only the transactions for November and December 2017 were uploaded in GSTR 1, while GSTR 3B included all transactions. The petitioner sought additional time to explain the disparity but failed to upload the response due to technical issues.
Court Proceedings and Arguments: During the proceedings, the petitioner’s counsel emphasized the unintentional nature of the error and the need for a fair opportunity to clarify the mismatch. The petitioner agreed to remit 10% of the disputed tax demand as a pre-condition for remand.
The respondent, represented by Mrs. K. Vasanthamala, argued that natural justice was followed, citing the issuance of the show cause notice and the subsequent order. She maintained that the petitioner had been given sufficient time to respond.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
