Sri Velavan Fireworks Vs Commercial Tax Officer (Madras High Court)
The writ petition challenged an order dated 22.03.2024 passed by the Commercial Tax authorities. By consent of both parties, the Madras High Court took up the matter for disposal at the admission stage. The petitioner submitted that proceedings had earlier been initiated for delay in filing GSTR-3B returns for the period from April 2020 to March 2021, and an order dated 26.08.2022 had imposed interest and penalty. The interest for this delay was quantified at ₹71,963, which the petitioner had already paid.
Subsequently, the respondent passed another order dated 06.01.2023 for the very same issue and the same period, again quantifying interest at ₹68,025. The petitioner contended that this resulted in duplication of proceedings and amounted to double taxation, rendering the second demand unsustainable in law.
The Additional Government Pleader confirmed the petitioner’s submissions and fairly requested that the impugned order be quashed. After examining the records, the Court found that two different authorities had passed orders for the same delay period, leading to duplication and double taxation. Holding the impugned order dated 06.01.2023 to be unsustainable, the Court quashed it and allowed the writ petition, with no order as to costs.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 22.03.2024 passed by the respondent.
2. Mr. R. Suresh Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice on behalf of the respondents.
3. By consent of the parties, the main writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that initially, the proceedings was initiated and an order dated 26.08.2022 was passed imposing interest and penalty against the petitioner for the delay in filing the return in GSTR3B. For the delay period, viz., April-2020 to March-2021, the interest was quantified as a sum of Rs.71,963/- and the said amount was also duly paid by the petitioner. However, once again, the respondent had passed the impugned order dated 06.01.2023 by the respondent for the very same issue and very same period, whereby, the interest was quantified as a sum of Rs.68,025/-. Hence, he would contend that the said demand leads to double taxation and the same is not sustainable in law. Thus, he requests this Court to quash the impugned order dated 06.01.2023.
5. In reply, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent had confirmed the submissions made by the petitioner and fairly requests this Court to quash the impugned order.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondent and also perused the materials available on record.
7. In the case on hand, two different orders were passed by two different Authorities for imposing delay in filing the GSTR-3B returns pertaining to very same period, viz., April 2020 to March 2021. Hence, it is clear that there is duplication of proceedings, which leads to double taxation. When such being the case, as rightly contended by the petitioner, the impugned order passed by the respondent is not sustainable in law and hence, the same is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 06.01.2023 is hereby quashed.
8. In the result, this writ petition is allowed. No cost. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed.
