9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (10) TMI 146 - HC - GSTProper communication of notices or not - mismatch between the details in Form GSTR-1 and Form GSTR-3B - HELD THAT - The discrepancy appears to arises on account of the amount deducted by the deductor and declared in Form GSTR-7 which requires to be explained by the petitioner. The Court is of the view, the petitioner therefore deserves a fair chance as admittedly there appears to be a discrepancy in the turn over pointed out in Form GST ASMT-10 dated 21.03.2022. and in Form GSTR-1 and Form GSTR-3B - Court is not inclined to direct the petitioner to approach the Appellate Authority as the matter would require a proper consideration, so that in case of any other discrepancy, the matter can be later decided in hierarchy of the Appellate Forum prescribed under the TNGST Act, 2017. The impugned order set aside - matter remitted back to the respondent to pass a fresh order on merits and in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - petition disposed off.
Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are related to an aggrieved petitioner challenging an Assessment Order due to alleged discrepancies in the communication of notices under the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax (TNGST) Act, 2017. Impugned Assessment Order: The petitioner contested an Assessment Order dated 08.05.2023, which followed notices in Form GST ASMT-10 dated 21.03.2022, Form GST DRC-01A dated 19.08.2022, and Form GST DRC-01 dated 27.10.2022. The petitioner failed to respond to the latter two notices, leading to the issuance of the impugned Assessment Order. Communication of Notices: The petitioner claimed that recent notices were hosted in a different section of the Dashboard, causing them to miss Form GST DRC-01A and Form GST DRC-01 notices. The respondent argued that proper communication was made in accordance with Section 169 of the TNGST Act, 2017, and suggested the petitioner seek remedy through the Appellate Authority. Discrepancy in Turnover Details: The court noted a discrepancy between the details in Form GSTR-1 and Form GSTR-3B, specifically related to deductions declared in Form GSTR-7. The petitioner was required to explain this discrepancy, and the court acknowledged the need for a fair chance to address the issue. Court Decision: The court set aside the impugned order, remitting the case back to the respondent for a fresh order within three months. The respondent was directed to address the issue of hosting information in the Dashboard properly. The court decided not to direct the petitioner to approach the Appellate Authority, allowing for a proper consideration of the matter. Conclusion: The court's decision favored the petitioner, granting them an opportunity to address the discrepancies in the Assessment Order. The judgment emphasized the importance of proper communication of notices and the need for a fair chance to rectify any discrepancies in turnover details.
|
