D.Pitchairajan Vs Assistant Commissioner(ST)(FAC) (Madras High Court)
Summary: The Madras High Court considered writ petitions filed by D. Pitchairajan challenging assessment orders dated 22.06.2023 passed by the respondent for the assessment years 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20.
The petitioner stated that his mother, D. Parvatham, was the proprietrix of M/s. Parvathaa Exports and had died on 13.05.2023. Despite her death, the impugned assessment orders dated 22.06.2023 were passed in her name in respect of the relevant assessment years. The petitioner contended that assessment orders passed against a deceased person were a nullity, relying upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Shabina Abraham vs. the Collector of Central Excise and Customs, reported in (2015) 322 ELT 372 (SC). Shabina Abraham & Others Vs Collector of Central Excise
The petitioner further submitted that he was unaware of the assessment orders and came to know about them only after a notice of attachment was issued on 29.02.2024 under Section 79(1)(c) of the TNGST Act, 2017 read with Rule 145(1) of the TNGST Act, 2017 in GST DRC-13. GST Recovery: Law & Procedure for Unpaid Dues, Interest, Penalties, Late Fees
On the merits of the underlying dispute, the petitioner submitted that the dispute arose from mismatches between the regular returns filed in GSTR 01 and the returns filed in GSTR 3B, as well as the information captured in the GSTR 3B return and the auto-populated credit in GSTR 2A. It was submitted that, if an opportunity were granted, the petitioner would be able to explain the discrepancies on merits and produce relevant records to substantiate his position.
