Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Tvl. S S Enterprises Electricals Vs State Tax Officer 1 (Madras High Court)
Appeal Number : W.P. No.35767 of 2024
Date of Judgement/Order : 29/11/2024
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Tvl. S S Enterprises Electricals Vs State Tax Officer (Madras High Court)

In a recent judgment, the Madras High Court overturned an GST assessment order against Tvl. S S Enterprises Electricals due to the absence of a personal hearing, citing a violation of natural justice principles. The petitioner, engaged in works contract and electrical equipment sales, contested discrepancies highlighted during an inspection. Despite filing responses, the order was issued without allowing sufficient opportunity to present evidence. The court referenced precedent, requiring a 10% deposit of disputed taxes for remand, facilitating further review by the adjudicating authority.

The court directed the petitioner to deposit 10% of the disputed tax within four weeks, adjusting any prior payments made. Non-compliance would reinstate the initial assessment. The judgment emphasizes procedural fairness in tax assessments, aligning with recent judicial precedents ensuring taxpayer rights and procedural integrity.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

The present writ petition is filed challenging the impugned order Order GSTIN. No. 33AGRPA3240P1ZA /2020-2021, dated 19.07.2024 passed by the respondent on the premise that the same was made in violation of principles of natural justice.

2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is engaged in works contract and dealer in electrical transformers, static converters and is registered under the GST Act. During the relevant period of 2020-21, the petitioner has filed the returns and paid appropriate taxes. Based on the authorization issued by the Joint Commissioner (ST)Intelligence-I, the petitioner’s place of business was inspected. During the course of such inspection, the following discrepancies were noticed:

Particulars Act 2020-21
Credit notes for the year 2020-21 CGST

SGST
IGST

71,511

71,511

Supplies to SEZs on payment of tax reported in GSTR-9 CGST

SGST
IGST

22,898

22,898

Supplies to SEZs without payment of tax reported in GSTR-9 CGST

SGST
IGST

1,593

1,593

Difference between ITC
Table 8A and 8B in GSTR 9
CGST

SGST

IGST

1,52,158
Excess claim of Input Tax Credit (3B vs 2A) CGST

SGST

IGST

3,74,312

3,74,312

Difference in Tax liability between GSTR 3B and GSTR CGST

SGST

IGST

70,784

70,784

 

Blocked credit u/s 17(5) CGST

SGST

IGST

26,841

26,841

Total 14,40,195

 

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that an intimation in DRC 01A was issued on 14.09.2023, followed by a show cause notice in Form DRC 01 on 27.12.2023 and reminders on 12.02.2024, 17.02.2024 and 22.02.2024. Further personal hearing was offered on 10.04.2024. The petitioner had filed its reply on 17.04.2024, however, the impugned order was passed on the premise that the petitioner had not produced documents in support of its contention. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that if the petitioner is provided with an opportunity, he would be able to explain the discrepancies.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would place reliance upon the recent judgment of this Court in the case of Sree Manoj International Vs. Deputy State Tax Officer in W.P.No.10977 of 2024 dated 25.04.2024, to submit that this court has remanded the matter back in similar circumstances subject to payment of 10% of the disputed taxes.

5. It was further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to pay 10% of the disputed tax and that he may be granted one final opportunity before the adjudicating authority to put forth their objections to the proposal, to which the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent does not have any serious objection.

6. By consent of parties, the writ petition stands disposed of on the following terms:

a) The impugned order dated 19.07.2024 is set aside

b) The petitioner shall deposit 10% of the disputed taxes as admitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

c) If any amount has been recovered or paid out of the disputed taxes, including by way of pre-deposit in appeal, the same would be reduced/adjusted, from/towards the 10% of disputed taxes directed to be paid. The assessing authority shall then intimate the balance amount out of 10 % of disputed taxes to be paid, if any, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner shall deposit such remaining sum within a period of three weeks from such intimation.

d) The entire exercise of verification of payment, if any, intimation of the balance sums, if any, to be paid for compliance with the direction of payment of 10% of the disputed taxes, after deducting the sums already paid and payment by the petitioner of the balance amount, if any, on intimation in compliance of the above direction, shall be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

e) Failure to comply with the above condition viz., payment of 10% of disputed taxes within the stipulated period i.e., four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order shall result in restoration of the impugned order.

f) If there is any recovery by way of attachment of Bank account or garnishee proceedings, the same shall be lifted /withdrawn on complying with the above condition viz., payment of 10 % of the disputed taxes.

g) On complying with the above condition, the impugned order of assessment shall be treated as show cause notice and the petitioner shall submit its objections within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order along with supporting documents/material. If any such objections are filed, the same shall be considered by the respondent and orders shall be passed in accordance with law after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. It is made clear that if the above conditions viz., 10% of disputed taxes is not complied or objections are not filed within the stipulated period, four weeks respectively from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the impugned order of assessment shall stand restored.

7. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

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
Ads Free tax News and Updates
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
February 2025
M T W T F S S
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
2425262728