Case Law Details
Sri Ragava Paper Vs Deputy Commissioner (ST) (Madras High Court)
In a significant development, the Madras High Court has directed the reconsideration of a GST order involving Sri Ragava Paper and unreported e-way bills. The court’s decision mandates a reassessment of the case on the condition that the petitioner, Sri Ragava Paper, remits an additional 5% of the disputed tax demand. This ruling underscores the importance of procedural fairness and the necessity for businesses to have adequate opportunities to contest tax demands.
The case revolves around two critical orders: an original order dated September 4, 2023, and an appellate order dated April 12, 2024. Sri Ragava Paper challenged these orders, arguing that they were not given a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on its merits. The petitioner attributed the oversight to their accountant, who failed to inform them about the proceedings.
The petitioner’s counsel highlighted that due to the Covid-19 pandemic, the business was not operational, resulting in nil returns being filed. Upon discovering the original order, an appeal was promptly filed, which was subsequently rejected due to being filed after the limitation period. Despite this, Sri Ragava Paper showed their willingness to comply by paying 10% of the disputed tax at the time of filing the appeal and agreed to pay an additional 5% for a chance to have the case re-evaluated.
Representing the respondents, Mr. T. N. C. Kaushik, the learned Additional Government Pleader, confirmed that notices were issued to Sri Ragava Paper, including a notice in Form ASMT 10, a show cause notice, and a personal hearing notice. However, the petitioner did not respond to these notices, leading to the confirmation of the tax proposal.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
