GST assessment order challenged on the ground that it proceeded on a basis different from the show cause notice. The court held the order, which imposed higher tax and penalty without a fresh notice, unsustainable and set it aside, permitting fresh proceedings.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.No.11030 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 26.04.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
W.P.No.11030 of 2024 and W.M.P.Nos.12108 & 12109 of 2024
Vela Agencies Rep by its Proprietor D.Jagannathan D.No.307, Hospital Road, Kavindapadi, Erode, Tamil Nadu 638 455. ... Petitioner
-vs-
Assistant Commissioner ST FAC Bhavani Assessment Circle No.158/1002, Pookadai Veedhi Bhavani, Erode District 638 001. ... Respondent
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the impugned order of the respondent passed in GSTIN: 33AEZPJ742B1ZF / 20182019 dated 23.06.2023 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Murali
1/6
W.P.No.11030 of 2024
For Respondent : Mr.V.Prashanth Kiran, GA (T)
ORDER
An order dated 23.06.2023 is assailed on the ground that the impugned order proceeds on a completely different basis from the show cause notice. The petitioner received intimation dated 24.11.2022 and show cause notice dated 29.12.2022. The petitioner replied to the intimation on 28.12.2022 by stating that the petitioner was a distributor of Aircel Limited (Aircel) and that the petitioner was unable to conduct business after 28.02.2018 due to the closure of the business of Aircel. The impugned order was issued in these circumstances.
and show cause notice and pointed out that the petitioner was called upon to show cause as to why tax liability of Rs.8,27,252/- should not
be imposed with regard to sales suppression, which was estimated
2/6
W.P.No.11030 of 2024
on the basis of the Input Tax Credit availed of by the petitioner. In contrast, learned counsel submits that tax liability of Rs.14,97,072/was imposed under the impugned order by comparing the petitioner's GSTR 3B return and the GSTR 2A. Learned counsel also points out that a reversal was made of Input Tax Credit from the electronic credit ledger of the petitioner to the extent of Rs.7,52,047/-
on 15.02.2024. Therefore, he submits that the matter requires reconsideration.
accepts notice for the respondent. In view of the petitioner's reply to the intimation, learned counsel submits that the petitioner is clearly not entitled to Input Tax Credit. Consequently, he submits that the impugned order does not contain any infirmity.
3/6
W.P.No.11030 of 2024
assumption that there was sales suppression. By contrast, the impugned order imposes tax liability of Rs.14,97,072/- and an equal amount by way of penalty. It is also clear that the impugned order does not proceed on the basis of sales suppression. If the respondent intended to modify the tax proposal in light of the petitioner's reply, a fresh show cause notice should have been issued. It is also noticeable that the petitioner's electronic credit ledger was debited to the extent of Rs.7,52,047/-. In these circumstances, the impugned order cannot be sustained.
4/6
W.P.No.11030 of 2024
26.04.2024
rna Index : No Internet : Yes Neutral Citation: No
To
Assistant Commissioner ST FAC Bhavani Assessment Circle No.158/1002, Pookadai Veedhi Bhavani, Erode District 638 001.
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY,J
rna
5/6
W.P.No.11030 of 2024
W.P.No.11030 of 2024 and W.M.P.Nos.12108 & 12109 of 2024
26.04.2024
6/6
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a GST assessment order imposing liability on a different basis (GSTR 3B vs GSTR 2A comparison) from the show cause notice (sales suppression) could be sustained.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Vela Agencies rep by its Proprietor D.Jagannathan
Assistant Commissioner ST FAC Bhavani Assessment Circle
Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
