Madras High Court
Rk Constructions vs State Tax Officer on 3 January, 2025
Author: Mohammed Shaffiq
Bench: Mohammed Shaffiq
W.P.No.39824 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 03.01.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
W.P. No.39824 of 2024
and
W.M.P.Nos.43157 and 43158 of 2024
RK Constructions
Rep. by its Managing Partner
K.Manivannan
No.101, Engineer Thottam,
Mookaneri, Salem 636 008. ... Petitioner
Vs.
State Tax Officer
Ayyothapattinam Circle
Integrated Commercial Taxes Officer Complex
No.17, Pitchards Road, Salem 636 007. ... Respondent
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the impugned order of the
respondent passed in TNGST/33AAGFR3079L1ZW/2018-19 dated
30.04.2024 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : M/s.A.Divya
For Respondent : Ms.Amrita Dinakaran,
Government Advocate.
ORDER
The present writ petition is filed challenging the impugned order passed
by the respondent dated 30.04.2024 relating to the assessment year 2018-19.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2. The petitioner is a works contractor and is registered under the Goods
and Services Tax Act, 2017. During the relevant period of 2018-19, the
petitioner filed its returns and paid the appropriate taxes. However, during the
scrutiny of the petitioner's return, it was noticed that there was an alleged
mismatch between GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B.
2.1. Pursuant thereto, a Show Cause Notice in DRC-01 was issued on
20.11.2023. Personal hearing was offered on 31.01.2024, 15.02.2024 and
28.02.2024. However, the petitioner had neither filed its reply nor availed the
opportunity for a personal hearing. Hence, the impugned order came to be
passed, confirming the proposal.
3. 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 sending it by RPAD, instead it had been uploaded
under View Additional Notices column in the GST Portal, thereby, the
petitioner was unaware of the initiated proceedings and was thus unable to
participate in the adjudication proceedings.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that if the
petitioner is provided with an opportunity, they would be able to explain the
alleged discrepancies.. The learned counsel for the petitioner would then place
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
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, to
submit that this court has remanded the matter back in similar circumstances
subject to payment of 25% of the disputed taxes. It was further submitted
subsequent to passing of the impugned order, the petitioner had remitted entire
disputed tax and that they 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.
5. By consent of both parties, the writ petition stands disposed of on the
following terms:
a) The impugned order dated 30.04.2024 is set aside.
b) The petitioner shall deposit 25% of the disputed taxes as admitted by
the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent, within a period of
four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
c) If any amount has been recovered or paid out of the disputed taxes,
including by way of pre-deposit in appeal, the same would be
reduced/adjusted, from/towards the 25% of disputed taxes directed to be paid.
The assessing authority shall then intimate the balance amount out of 25 % of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
disputed taxes to be paid, if any, within a period of one week from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner shall deposit such remaining
sum within a period of three weeks from such intimation.
d) The entire exercise of verification of payment, if any, intimation of
the balance sums, if any, to be paid for compliance with the direction of
payment of 25% of the disputed taxes, after deducting the sums already paid
and payment by the petitioner of the balance amount, if any, on intimation in
compliance with the above direction shall be completed within a period of
four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
e) Failure to comply with the above condition viz., payment of 25% of
disputed taxes within the stipulated period i.e., four weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order shall result in restoration of the impugned order.
f) If there is any recovery by way of attachment of Bank account or
garnishee proceedings, the same shall be lifted /withdrawn on complying with
the above condition viz., payment of 25 % of the disputed taxes.
g) 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. It is made clear that if the above
conditions viz., 25% of disputed taxes is not complied or objections are not
filed within the stipulated period, four weeks respectively from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order, the impugned order of assessment shall stand
restored.
6. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petitions are closed.
03.01.2025
Speaking (or) Non Speaking Order
Index : Yes/ No
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
shk
To:
State Tax Officer
Ayyothapattinam Circle
Integrated Commercial Taxes Officer Complex
No.17, Pitchards Road, Salem 636 007.
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
shk
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
and
W.M.P.Nos.43157 and 43158 of 2024
03.01.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
