Tvl. Arudra Engineering Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST) (Madras High Court)
The Madras High Court addressed the issue of whether C-Forms submitted by Tvl. Arudra Engineering Private Limited could be considered non-genuine without giving the petitioner a proper opportunity to prove their authenticity.
Background: An appellate order dated July 21, 2023, directed the assessing officer to grant a concession on the turnover covered by the C-Forms, contingent upon verifying their genuineness. Following this direction, the impugned order was issued.
Petitioner’s Argument: The petitioner challenged the impugned order, arguing that it wrongfully concluded that the C-Forms were not genuine. They claimed that this conclusion was reached without providing them a chance to demonstrate the authenticity of the C-Forms.
Respondent’s Argument: The Additional Government Pleader representing the respondent noted that the impugned order was issued based on instructions from the appellate authority to specifically assess the genuineness of the C-Forms.
Court’s Findings: The court observed that the notice issued on January 19, 2024, asking for additional documents did not specifically request the petitioner to prove the genuineness of the C-Forms. As a result, the petitioner was not given a fair opportunity to establish the validity of the C-Forms.
Order: The Madras High Court set aside the impugned order dated April 15, 2024. The case was remanded for reconsideration, allowing the petitioner to submit a reply along with relevant documents within fifteen days of receiving the court’s order. The assessing officer must provide a reasonable opportunity, including a personal hearing, and issue a new order within three months after receiving the petitioner’s reply.
Comments are closed.