Gillette India Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner (Madras High Court)
Madras High Court, in the case of Gillette India Limited vs Assistant Commissioner, granted the company a final opportunity to respond to a GST demand of Rs. 6.57 crore, contingent on a deposit of Rs. 1 crore. Gillette, a registered GST dealer, had faced scrutiny due to mismatches between its GSTR 3B and GSTR 2A/2B filings. The original tax demand, which had exceeded the proposed sum in the show cause notice by over Rs. 240 crore, was challenged by Gillette on the grounds of exceeding the scope of the notice and jurisdictional issues regarding transactions outside Tamil Nadu. The Court found procedural lapses in issuing the impugned order, particularly the additional demand beyond the show cause notice. It quashed the order, allowing Gillette to file its reply after depositing the required Rs. 1 crore. The Court also directed the GST authorities to reassess the matter while giving Gillette a fair opportunity to present its case. This judgment underscores the importance of following the statutory framework, respecting jurisdictional boundaries, and ensuring taxpayers’ right to a fair hearing before finalizing demands.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
The present writ petition is filed challenging the impugned order dated 13.08.2024 on the premise that the impugned order levies tax on supplies outside the State of Tamil Nadu, thereby suffers from want of jurisdiction. The impugned order is also challenged on the premise that it raises demand in excess of the amount of taxes proposed in the show cause notice thereby violating the mandate contained in Section 75(7) of the Act and thus violates principles of natural justice.
