Case Law Details
A.H. Enterprises Vs Deputy Commercial Tax Officer (Madras High Court)
Introduction: In a significant judgment, the Madras High Court, in the case of A.H. Enterprises vs. Deputy Commercial Tax Officer [Writ Petition No. 35894 of 2023 dated January 04, 2024], emphasized the mandatory requirement of providing a personal hearing under Section 75 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (TNGST Act) before passing a tax order. The Hon’ble Madras High Court held that it is mandatory to provide the personal hearing under Section 75 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (“the TNGST Act”) before passing an Order.
Facts:
A.H. Enterprises (“the Petitioner”) was called upon to pay a sum of INR 2,58,597/- towards the difference between returns filed in FORM GSTR 1 and FORM GSTR 3B including both interest and penalty vide Order dated October 11, 2023 (“Impugned Order”).
The Petitioner contended that the Impugned Order was issued without providing an opportunity of a personal hearing as mandated by Section 75 of the TNGST Act.
The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer (“the Respondent”) contended that the demand raised in the Impugned Order is the difference between the returns filed in FORM GSTR-1 and FORM GSTR 3B along with interest and penalty and the matter may be remanded for reconsideration.
Hence, the petition was filed by the Petitioner to challenge the Impugned Notice.
Issue:
Whether it is mandatory to provide an opportunity for the personal hearing before the issuance of an Order by the Authority?
Held:
The Madras High Court in Writ Petition No. 35894 of 2023 held as under:
- Held that, as per Section 75 of the TNGST Act, it is mandatory to provide the Personal Hearing to the Petition before the issuance of the Impugned Order.
- Directed that, the Respondent provide a Personal Hearing to the Petitioner and thereafter issue a reasoned order within a maximum period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Hence, the Impugned Order was quashed and remanded for reconsideration.
Conclusion: This ruling from the Madras High Court reinforces the importance of adhering to procedural requirements, specifically the mandatory provision of personal hearing under Section 75 of the TNGST Act before passing a tax order. Taxpayers can take note of this judgment to ensure that their rights to a fair hearing are safeguarded in tax proceedings.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
The petitioner challenges an order dated 11.10.2023 by which he was called upon to pay a sum of Rs.2,58,597/- towards amount due and payable as per the return filed by him in GSTR 1.
2. The petitioner asserts that the impugned order was issued without providing a personal hearing as mandated by Section 75 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
3. Mr. C. Harsha Raj, learned AGP, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent. He points out that the amount demanded represents the difference between the returns filed in GSTR 1 and GSTR 3B along with interest and penalty thereon. However, in view of the assertion that a personal hearing was not provided, he submits that the matter may be remanded for reconsideration.
4. In view of the statutory mandate for personal hearing and noncompliance therewith, the impugned order calls for interference. Therefore, the impugned order dated 11.10.2023 is quashed and the matter is remanded for reconsideration. The respondent is directed to provide a personal hearing to the petitioner and thereafter issue a reasoned order within a maximum period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
5. W.P.No.35894 of 2023 is disposed of on the above terms without any order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
*****
Author can be reached at info@a2ztaxcorp.com)