Tvl Karthikeya Authentic Andhra Restaurant Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST) (Madras High Court)
Summary: Madras High Court considered a writ petition challenging an order dated 30.08.2024 and the subsequent rejection of the petitioner’s rectification petition. The petitioner had discharged the entire tax demand on 19.10.2024, before the notified payment due date under the Section 128A GST amnesty scheme, and had referred to the scheme during the rectification proceedings.
It contended that these actions constituted substantial compliance and that the conditions prescribed under Rule 164 should be treated as directory rather than mandatory. The Court rejected this contention. It observed that the phrase “subject to such conditions as may be prescribed” in Section 128A(1) qualified the statutory relief and that the use of a comma did not make the prescribed conditions directory. Referring to its earlier decision in Incompressible Fluid Control System, the Court reiterated that the amnesty scheme was time-bound, its procedural timelines ran from or were closely connected with the filing of the waiver application, and timely filing was therefore an essential requirement.
Consequently, the condition prescribed in Rule 164(6) was held to be mandatory. Nevertheless, the Court noted that the original assessment order was passed ex parte and that the petitioner had fully discharged the tax demand, thereby protecting the Revenue’s interest. In the interest of justice, the original order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Assistant Commissioner for reconsideration after providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner. A fresh order was directed to be issued within five months.
Want to Read the Complete Judgment?
You have read the free case summary. Unlock the full judgment, the detailed judicial reasoning and the downloadable PDF, along with every other premium judgment on TaxGuru.
Already subscribed? Log in
One subscription covers the entire premium judgment library, not just this case.
