Tvl. Anandh Store Vs Commercial Tax Officer (Madras High Court)
In a significant ruling, the Madras High Court has addressed a dispute in the case of Tvl. Anandh Store Vs Commercial Tax Officer (W.P.No. 14849 of 2024). The court examined the discrepancies between the show cause notice (SCN) and the final order issued to the petitioner, ultimately directing that the impugned order be treated as an SCN.
The petitioner, Tvl. Anandh Store, challenged an order dated 09.11.2023, arguing that it extended beyond the scope of the original SCN. The SCN, issued on 20.10.2023, questioned a shortfall in Input Tax Credit (ITC) as reflected in the petitioner’s GSTR 2A, compared to their GSTR 3B returns, amounting to Rs.6,33,699/-. However, the impugned order confirmed a tax liability of Rs.9,34,236/-, which was significantly higher than the amount mentioned in the SCN. The petitioner’s counsel argued that comparing GSTR 2A and 3B for the financial year 2017-2018 was inappropriate since the GSTR 2A form had not been prescribed during that period. The counsel highlighted the procedural lapse, indicating that the final order imposed a liability beyond what was initially indicated in the SCN. In response, the learned Additional Government Pleader, C. Harsha Raj, acknowledged the notice for the respondent and conceded the disparity between the SCN and the impugned order. He agreed with the petitioner’s contention that the final order should be treated as an SCN, allowing the petitioner to respond appropriately. Upon reviewing the documents, the court concurred with the petitioner’s position. The judgment emphasized that the impugned order traveled beyond the scope of the SCN, rendering it procedurally unfair. Consequently, the court directed that the impugned order be treated as an SCN.
