Health Remedies Vs Assistant Commissioner of State Tax (Madras High Court)
Madras High Court remanded the matter back for reconsideration with condition to remit 5% of disputed tax demand since the tax proposal was confirmed because the tax payer did not appear for the personal hearing or respond to the show cause notice.
Facts- An order in original dated 20.12.2023 is challenged on the ground that the petitioner did not have a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits. The petitioner states that his GST registration was cancelled by order dated 25.09.2018 with effect from 31.08.2018. Since the show cause notice was uploaded on the common portal on 29.09.2023, which is about five years after the cancellation of the GST registration, it is stated that the petitioner did not monitor the portal and, consequently, could not participate in proceedings.
Conclusion- On examining the impugned order, it is evident that the tax proposal was confirmed because the tax payer did not appear for the personal hearing or respond to the show cause notice. The petitioner has also placed on record a copy of the electronic credit ledger. Prima facie, this document discloses that credit was available to the extent of Rs.5,09,847/- in the IGST column and Rs.30,377/- each in the CGST and SGST column. In these circumstances, albeit by putting the petitioner on terms, reconsideration is necessary.
