Sri Murugan Typewriting Institute Vs Deputy Commissioner (CT) (Madras High Court)
Madras High Court held that due to non-compliance with notice issued under GST, the petitioner is required to deposit 25% of disputed tax and post deposit of amount, the petitioner will be granted an opportunity of being heard.
Facts- The petitioner is engaged in the services of teaching typewriting and is a registered person under the Goods and Services Act, 2017. During the relevant period, the petitioner filed its return and paid the appropriate taxes. However, during the scrutiny of the petitioner’s return, it was found that there was mismatch between GSTR 1 and GSTR 3B. Subsequently, a notice was issued to the petitioner in Form ASMT-10 on 28.01.2023, followed by a notice in DRC-01A on 24.04.2023. The petitioner was also issued show cause notice in DRC-01 on 05.08.2023 and reminders on 07.09.2023, 06.10.2023 and 18.10.2023. However, the petitioner had neither filed its reply nor paid the tax amount. Hence, the impugned order came to be passed, confirming the proposal. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the first appellate authority, which was however rejected on the ground that the same is beyond the statutory period.
