Case Law Details
Guru Cycle Mart Vs State Tax Officer (Intelligence) (Madras High Court)
The Madras High Court recently rendered a significant judgment in the case of Guru Cycle Mart versus the State Tax Officer, addressing issues under Section 73 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (TNGST Act). The core contention revolved around the issuance of Form GST DRC-01 without an accompanying show cause notice, which the petitioner argued violated principles of natural justice.
The petitioner, represented by Mr. A. Satheesh Murugan, contested that despite receiving intimation notices (DRC-01A and DRC-01), they were not accompanied by a formal show cause notice. The petitioner responded to these notices but proceeded to challenge the subsequent orders dated May 3, 2024, and May 6, 2024, issued under Section 73 of the TNGST Act.
The High Court, after considering submissions from both sides, acknowledged that the impugned orders were indeed issued in contravention of principles of natural justice. The Court emphasized that the right to a fair hearing and the opportunity to respond to allegations are fundamental aspects of procedural fairness in administrative proceedings.
Consequently, the Madras High Court quashed the orders issued under Section 73 and directed that they be treated as an addendum to the notice in DRC-01. The petitioner was granted 30 days to respond to these revised proceedings. Additionally, the Court instructed the respondent authority to complete the proceedings within three months from the date of the order.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Heard Mr. A. Satheesh Murugan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R. Suresh Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondent.
2. By this common order, both the writ petitions are being disposed of.
3. In these writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned orders passed under Section 73 of the TNGST Act, 2017 dated 03.05.2024 and 06.05.2024.
4. The case of the petitioner is that although intimation in DRC-01A and DRC 01 was issued, DRC-01 did not accompany any show cause notice. It is further submitted that the petitioner had replied to the intimation notice dated 04.09.2023. However, without issuance of the show cause notice along with on 02.05.2024 and 03.05.2024. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court.
5. Having considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents, it is evident that the impugned orders have been passed in violation of principles of natural justice.
6. Considering the same, the impugned orders are quashed and the same shall be treated as addendum to the notice in DRC-01. The petitioner shall file a reply to the same within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is expected that the respondent will complete the proceeding within a period of 3 months thereafter.
7. The Writ Petitions stand allowed, accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
Author Bio
