Madras High Court
Tvl.V.Kannan vs The Assistant Commissioner (St) (Fac) on 23 October, 2024
Author: Mohammed Shaffiq
Bench: Mohammed Shaffiq
W.P.(MD).No.25200 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 23.10.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
W.P.(MD).No.25200 of 2024
and
W.M.P.(MD).No.21409 of 2024
Tvl.V.Kannan ... Petitioner
Vs.
The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC),
Chokkikulam Circle,
Madurai. ...Respondent
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the
impugned assessment order on the file of respondent vide GSTIN:
33AIGPK8199L1ZM/2019-20, dated 10.06.2023 and quash the same as illegal
and devoid of merits and direct the respondent to redo the assessment
proceedings for the year 2019-20.
For Petitioner : Mr.Raja.Karthikeyan
For Respondent : Mr.J.K.Jayselan
Government Advocate
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.25200 of 2024
ORDER
The present Writ Petition is filed challenging the impugned order dated
10.06.2023 relating to the assessment year 2019-20.
2. The impugned order is challenged on the premise that neither the show
cause notices nor the impugned order of assessment has been served on the
petitioner by tender or RPAD, instead it had been uploaded in the GSTIN
portal. It was further submitted that the petitioner was unable to access the
GSTIN portal and thus unable to participate in the adjudication proceedings.
3. The limited issue that arises for consideration in the impugned order is
the alleged mismatch between GSTR-07 vs GSTR-01 and GSTR-2A vs
GSTR-3B. 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
above discrepancies.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would place reliance upon the
recent judgment of this Court in the case of Sree Manoj International Vs.
Deputy State Tax Officer in W.P.No.10977 of 2024 dated 25.04.2024.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5. 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
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 the petitioner is
ready and willing to pay 10% 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 Government Advocate
appearing for the respondent does not have any serious objection.
6. In view thereof, the impugned order is set aside and the petitioner shall
deposit 10% 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 objections are not filed within the stipulated period,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
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.
7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no
order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
23.10.2024
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
Lm
To
The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC),
Chokkikulam Circle,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
Lm
23.10.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
