Tvl. Sornam Medicals Vs Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Madras High Court)
Madras HC directed to deposit 25% of disputed tax while allowing one more opportunity of being heard
Madras High Court held that order is passed based on non-response to notice and hearing notice by the petitioner. Accordingly, order quashed with direction to the petitioner to deposit 25% of the disputed tax and direction to department to grant one more opportunity.
Facts- In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent for the assessment year 2017-18, dated 31.12.2023. Notably, the petitioner has failed to respond to the notices issued to the petitioner both in DRC 01A dated 23.09.2023 and in DRC 01, dated 29.09.2023. The petitioner has also failed to take advantage of the personal hearing notice dated 09.11.2023.
It is contested that the department has arrived at a difference in the turn over based on the information generated in GSTR-2A without realising that the petitioner was not availing input tax credit after the petitioner opted to pay tax u/s. 10 of the respective GST enactment. That apart, it is submitted that from October 2017, the petitioner had also stopped availing input tax credit and therefore, the petitioner has been visited with an unjust demand.
