Case Law Details
M. Arumugam Vs Deputy State Tax Officer (Madras High Court)
In the case of M. Arumugam vs Deputy State Tax Officer-I, the Madras High Court addressed the challenge against an assessment order and a bank attachment notice. The petitioner had received notices regarding discrepancies in their GST returns and subsequent tax demands.
The petitioner had replied to a notice dated 05.02.2023 but mistakenly indicated the wrong assessment period. Subsequently, the petitioner did not respond to a show cause notice dated 19.09.2023, leading to the issuance of the impugned assessment order.
The petitioner’s counsel argued that the tax demand for IGST should not apply to imports from a Special Economic Zone (SEZ) to the domestic tariff area. Additionally, the petitioner claimed entitlement to the benefit of Circular No.183 regarding input tax credit claimed in respect of CGST and SGST.
The Government Advocate pointed out the petitioner’s failure to reply to the show cause notice or participate in proceedings. However, the petitioner had submitted relevant documents regarding purchases from a SEZ unit, which were not considered due to the lack of a response to the show cause notice.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
