LRS and Co. Vs State Tax Officer (Madras High Court)
In the case of LRS and Co. vs. State Tax Officer, the Madras High Court quashed a GST demand order that persisted even after the petitioner paid their dues. The petitioner, a government contractor, had delayed paying their tax liability for the 2023-2024 assessment year. Following the issuance of a demand in Form GST DRC-01D, the company paid the full tax amount plus interest. However, the initial demand order was not withdrawn, prompting the company to file a writ petition. The petitioner’s counsel noted that 75% of the disputed tax was already paid before the order was issued.
The Additional Government Pleader confirmed that the admitted tax and interest had been recovered post-demand. The court, led by this admission, quashed the impugned order. It directed the State Tax Officer to issue a new, suitable order to appropriate the amounts already paid. The court also ordered the respondent to refund any excess payment to the petitioner within four weeks of receiving the order, effectively disposing of the writ petition without costs. The ruling highlights the court’s view that a tax demand should not remain active once the liability is settled. No specific judicial precedents were cited in the provided text.
