Frontline Wind Energy Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST) (Madras High Court)
In a recent ruling Hon’ble Madras HC remanded back the matter after observing that department issued 2nd notice after considering the reply of petitioner in response to 1st notice where department admitted that petitioner is not liable to pay tax.
Petitioner purchased a Wind Electric Generator Park consisting of 20 Wind Mills under Slump Sale Agreemen. Thereafter business was sold under Sale of business Agreement for a sale consideration of Rs.9,50,00,000/-. Department issued notice in which it was proposed to tax the entire amount together with further addition of profit and 18% under TNGST on the basis of the data from the 6th Annual Report of the petitioner for the FY 2019-2020. Petitioner filed reply to the notice. Respondent issued 2nd notice where it admitted that petitioner was not liable to pay tax on the entire sale consideration for the sale of a business for a sum of Rs.9,50,00,000/- but held liable to tax the differential amount of Rs.84,32,205/- as offered by the petitioner. Subsequently, department confirmed the demand on the entire amount of Rs.10,34,32,205/-.
It is argued by petitioner that there is no legal basis for sustaining the demand and there is a complete arbitrariness in the assessment order. On the other hand, department submitted that the impugned order does not suffer from any irregularity. Petitioner has an alternate remedy under Section 107 of the GST Act before the Appellate Authority.
