Madras High Court
M/S.K.R.Estates Builders vs The Assistant Commissioner (St) (Fac) on 19 October, 2024
Author: Mohammed Shaffiq
Bench: Mohammed Shaffiq
W.P.(MD)No.20845 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 19.10.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
W.P.(MD)No.20845 of 2024
and
W.M.P.(MD)Nos.17675 and 17676 of 2024
M/s.K.R.Estates Builders,
No.333/1, Courtralam Road,
Tenkasi District,
Represented by its Sole Proprietor,
Kalidasan Rajagopalan ... Petitioner
Vs.
The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC),
Tenkasi District,
Tenkasi. ... Respondent
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining
to the order dated 14.12.2023 in GSTIN.33ACQPR3056D1ZL/2017-2018
passed by the respondent, set aside the same and to direct the respondent to redo
the assessment for the year 2017-2018 by providing an opportunity to the
petitioner.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.20845 of 2024
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Dinesh Hari Sudarsan
For Respondent : Mr.R.Suresh Kumar
Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
The present Writ Petition is filed challenging the order dated 14.12.2023,
on the premise that the petitioner was found to have allegedly indulged in bill
trading activity that issuance of invoices without involvement of/supply of
goods.
2. It is found in the assessment order that a show cause notice was issued
in Form DRC 01 on 08.08.2023 through GST portal. However, the petitioner
had not chosen to file any objection neither appeared for personal hearing.
Subsequently, three reminders were also sent calling upon the petitioner to
appear for personal hearing which was also not availed of by him.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the
petitioner concern is not indulged in the building construction and it is
registered under GST Act. The petitioner has also paid appropriate taxes and
returns regularly. The petitioner was unaware of the personal hearing dates in
the show cause notice, as it had been uploaded in the GSTIN portal. It was
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
further submitted that the petitioner was unable to access the GSTIN portal and
thus unable to file his objection.
4. The limited issue that arises for consideration is that the respondent
while perusing the petitioner's GSTR-3B returns for the year 2017-2018, found
that the petitioner had wrongly claimed the Input Tax Credit in respect of
invoices with regard to which it was found in the impugned order that there was
no involvement / supply of goods. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that if the petitioner is provided with an opportunity, he would be able
to explain the alleged discrepancies.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner would place reliance upon the
recent judgment of this Court in the case of M/s.K.Balakrishnan, Balu Cables
vs. O/o. the Assistant Commissioner of GST & Central Excise in W.P.
(MD)No.11924 of 2024 dated 10.06.2024.
6. It was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that with the
introduction of GST, there were several technical glitches in the portal and the
assessees were also taking time to adapt to the e-mechanism and it was only in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
view of the same that the petitioner was unable to respond to the above notices
and the order of adjudication. It was further submitted that that the petitioner is
ready and willing to pay 25% of the disputed tax and that he may be granted one
final opportunity before the adjudicating authority to put forth their objections
to the proposal, to which the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing
for the respondent does not have any serious objection.
7. In view thereof, the impugned order is set aside and the petitioner shall
deposit 25% of the disputed tax within a period of two (2) weeks from the date
of receipt of a copy of this order. On complying with the above condition, the
impugned order of assessment shall be treated as show cause notice and the
petitioner shall submit its objections within a period of four (4) weeks from the
date of receipt of a copy of this order along with supporting
documents/material. If any such objections are filed, the same shall be
considered by the respondent and orders shall be passed in accordance with law
after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. If the above
deposit is not paid or the objections are not filed within the stipulated period,
i.e., two weeks and four weeks respectively, from the date of receipt of a copy
of this order, the impugned order of assessment shall stand revived.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
8. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no
order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
19.10.2024
NCC:yes/no
Index:yes/no
Internet:yes/no
Nsr
To:
The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC),
Tenkasi District,
Tenkasi.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
Nsr
19.10.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
