Case Law Details
Abitha Timber Traders Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST)(FAC) (Madras High Court)
In the case of Abitha Timber Traders Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST)(FAC), the Madras High Court addressed discrepancies found in the petitioner’s returns for the Assessment Year 2019-2020.
The petitioner, a Timber Trader, challenged the order passed by the respondent regarding discrepancies in their returns. The petitioner argued that they were not provided with a proper opportunity for a hearing and were unaware of notices issued through the online portal due to their lack of familiarity with advanced technology.
The respondent, represented by the Additional Government Pleader, contended that notices were served through the online portal as per Section 169(d) of the TNGST Act 2017, and it was the petitioner’s responsibility to verify them. The respondent highlighted the petitioner’s failure to present any evidence during the enquiry and emphasized the availability of an appeal remedy.
The court examined the submissions from both parties and referenced previous rulings. It acknowledged the provisions of Section 169(d) allowing notices to be served through the common portal but also recognized other modes of service available under Section 169 of the TNGST Act 2017.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
