Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Annalakshmi Stores Vs Deputy State Tax (Madras High Court)
Appeal Number : Writ Petition Nos.12371, 12390, 12392 & 12396 of 2024
Date of Judgement/Order : 10/06/2024
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Annalakshmi Stores Vs Deputy State Tax (Madras High Court)

In the case of Annalakshmi Stores vs. Deputy State Tax, Madras High Court addressed writ petitions challenging assessment orders under Section 63 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act) concerning specific assessment periods. The primary issue revolved around the cancellation of GST registration of Annalakshmi Stores with retrospective effect from 31st August 2017 due to non-filing of returns continuously for six months. The petitioner contended that they were unaware of the issuance of notices and show cause notices because these documents were uploaded using a temporary ID, which they did not have access to.

The petitioner’s counsel argued that under Section 63 and Rule 100 of the TNGST Rules, issuance of a show cause notice in Form GST ASMT-14 is mandatory for proceedings initiated under Section 63. They emphasized that uploading such notices on a temporary ID does not constitute proper service as per Section 169 of the GST enactments applicable. It was further highlighted that despite efforts to file statutory appeals against the tax demands, they were unable to do so due to the use of the temporary ID.

On behalf of the government, the learned Additional Government Pleader countered that the petitioner’s email ID and mobile number, as per their original GST registration, were used for the temporary ID. They argued that the petitioner had access to this temporary ID as the relevant password was communicated to the registered email and mobile number.

Examining the impugned orders, the Court noted that the tax liability had been computed on a best judgment basis, relying on auto-populated GSTR-2A data without giving the petitioner an opportunity to present their objections in person. Considering these circumstances, the Court found it just and necessary to afford the petitioner an opportunity to contest the tax proposals on merit.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031