Case Law Details
Lekshmi Marketing Vs State Tax Officer (Madras High Court)
In Lekshmi Marketing Vs State Tax Officer, the Madras High Court has directed the petitioner to pursue an appeal with the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (GST) due to an error in filing Form GST DRC 3B for the assessment year 2017-18. The petitioner had mistakenly entered the Income Tax Credit in the wrong section, resulting in a denial of credit totaling Rs.15,386.37 for both Central and State Tax. Although the petitioner had responded to the show cause notice preceding the order, the court focused on the procedural aspect rather than the correctness of the decision. The court allowed the petitioner 30 days to file the statutory appeal with the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (GST), who must then adjudicate the appeal within three months. The decision provides the petitioner an opportunity to correct the mistake and have the case reviewed on its merits, with consideration of related assessments for the following year.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents.
2. The petitioner has challenged the impugned order passed by the respondent on 23.12.2023 bearing reference No. GSTIN 33BAQPR9712P1ZS for the assessment year 2017-18. The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition on 11.06.2024.
3. The case of the petitioner appears to be the petitioner made a wrong entry in Form GST DRC 3B, while filing the Income Tax Credit in Serial No.4.A. (3) instead of Serial No.4.A.(5), as a result of which, the aforesaid credit of Rs.15,386.37/- each towards the Central Tax and State Tax availed as Income Tax Credit, is sought to be denied.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the mistake occurred on account of the wrong entry made while filing Form GST DRC 3B for the assessment year 2017-18 and that the mistake arose on account of the fact that the petitioner as also the petitioner’s staff were still getting used to various forms required to be filed under the provisions of the TNGST Act, 2017.
5. It is noticed that the petitioner has already filed a reply to the show cause notice that preceded the impugned order issued by the first respondent.
6. This Court is not really concerned with the correctness of the decision in the impugned order. However, the Court is only concerned with the decision making process. The petitioner has an alternative remedy to file an Appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (GST), Madurai and Tirunelveli against the impugned order.
7. At best, the petitioner can be given a liberty to file statutory appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (GST), Madurai and Tirunelveli.
8. Since the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (GST), Madurai and Tirunelveli is not a party to this proceedings, the Appellate Deputy Commissioner(GST), Madurai and Tirunelveli, is impleaded as sue moto as second respondent.
9. Considering the same, the Court is inclined to dispose of this Writ Petition by permitting the petitioner to file statutory appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (GST), Madurai and Tirunelveli.
10. The petitioner shall file an Appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner (GST), Madurai and Tirunelveli within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If the petitioner will comply with the requirements under Section 107 of TNGST Act, 2017, the second respondent shall entertain the Appeal and dispose of the same on merits and in accordance with law within three months thereafter.
11. Since the petitioner is entitled to all legal defence that are available, the second respondent while passing the orders on merits, may look into the assessment order dated 01.04.2024 for the assessment year 2018-19.
This Writ Petition is disposed of with above directions. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Author Bio
