Case Law Details
PBL Transport Corporation (P.) Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST) (Andhra Pradesh High Court)
Introduction: The Andhra Pradesh High Court recently issued a judgment in the case of PBL Transport Corporation (P.) Ltd. vs Assistant Commissioner (ST). The petitioner challenges the Final Audit Report dated 22.12.2023, alleging a violation of natural justice. This article provides an overview of the case, highlighting key arguments and legal principles.
Detailed Analysis: The core contention revolves around the petitioner’s claim that they submitted a reply on 19.12.2023 to a discrepancy notice but that the Final Audit Report, dated 22.12.2023, did not consider this response. Rule 101(4) of the Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax/Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 outlines the procedure for handling discrepancies noticed during an audit. The rule mandates that the proper officer must consider the reply furnished by the registered person before finalizing the audit findings.
The court, in its order dated 02.01.2024, emphasized the importance of considering the petitioner’s reply and acknowledged a potential violation of the principles of natural justice. The subsequent submission by the Government Pleader for Commercial Tax confirmed that the petitioner’s reply had not been noticed, leading to an inadvertent omission in the final audit report.
Rule 101 of the APGST/CGST Rules, 2017 specifies the audit process, and the failure to consider the petitioner’s response constitutes a breach of both statutory provisions and natural justice. The court, in its final decision, quashes the impugned Final Audit Report, highlighting the necessity for the authorities to reconsider the petitioner’s reply and finalize the audit report accordingly.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
