New Tea Exports Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST) (Madras High Court)
Madras High Court held that attachment of bank account of the petitioner unsustainable since there is enough Input Tax Credit (ITC) available with the petitioner. Accordingly, directed to de-freeze the bank account.
Facts- The petitioner has filed the present writ petition challenging the impugned order dated 19.07.2021 and the impugned recovery notice dated 05.05.2023 passed by the respondent for the assessment year 2017-2018.
Notably, it is contested that the petitioner had not received any notice with regard to personal hearing. Therefore, the petitioner was not in position to file a reply to the show cause notice, since the said notice was only uploaded through GST common portal in “Additional Notices Column” tab. As the petitioner had no knowledge about the same, the petitioner failed to submit its reply. Under these circumstances, the present impugned ex-parte order dated 19.07.2021 came to be passed by the respondent, without an opportunity to the petitioner to file the reply and without affording personal hearing to the petitioner.
Conclusion- Held that the petitioner has already paid the entire tax demand, and is only seeking an opportunity to file the reply to the show cause notice and personal hearing with respect to imposition of interest and the penalty, which the petitioner claims that they are not liable to pay. Even otherwise, as per the decision taken in the 53rd GST Council Meeting, the time is extended upto 31st March 2025. By applying the proposed amendment to Section 128(A) of the Act, the petitioner is not liable to pay any amount, since the enough amount is available in the ITC. Thus, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order dated 19.07.2021 passed by the respondent for fresh consideration.
