9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (10) TMI 795 - HC - GSTMaintainability of petition - availability of alternative remedy - Violation of principles of natural justice - opportunity of personal hearing not provided - procedure prescribed in Circular No.12 of 2022 dated 26.09.2022 not followed before passing impugned order - HELD THAT - Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, without adverting to the contention raised by the petitioner in the present writ petition and limited direction sought for by him, this Court grants liberty to the petitioner to file appeal against the impugned order within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such appeal being filed, the concerned Appellate Authority shall entertain the same without insisting upon the limitation aspect. It is open to the petitioner to raise all the issues that were raised before this Court including the refund of bank deposit, before the Appellate Authority, who shall decide the same in accordance with law and on merits. This Writ Petition is dismissed.
Issues involved:
The writ petition challenges an impugned order in Form GST DRC-07 issued by the 1st respondent without providing a personal hearing or following prescribed procedures. The petitioner, being of limited education, argues for alternative communication methods under Section 169 of the CGST/TN GST Act, 2017 to ensure effective communication. Additionally, the petitioner asserts compliance with Section 16(2) of the GST Act 2017 regarding availing Input Tax Credit (ITC), presenting evidence of receiving goods and paying GST. The petitioner also highlights delays in response to show cause notices and the inability to file an appeal within the stipulated time limit under Section 107 of the Act. Analysis for each issue: The petitioner challenges the impugned order for lack of personal hearing and failure to follow prescribed procedures. The petitioner, being of limited education, argues for alternative communication methods under Section 169 of the CGST/TN GST Act, 2017 to ensure effective communication. The petitioner contends that effective communication should consider the educational background of the assessee, suggesting that communication through e-mail or other modes may be necessary for uneducated individuals, as computer knowledge should not be a mandatory requirement for conducting business, as it may infringe on fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(g). The petitioner asserts compliance with Section 16(2) of the GST Act 2017 regarding availing Input Tax Credit (ITC). The petitioner, a dealer in aluminum scrap, provides evidence of receiving goods in their premises, possessing invoices, and fulfilling all requirements for availing ITC. Despite delays in responses to show cause notices, the petitioner maintains that the reply submitted should be considered under Section 161 of the CGST/SGST Act. The petitioner emphasizes adherence to Circular 14/2022-TNGST and challenges the necessity of filing an appeal within the stipulated time limit under Section 107 of the Act, given the ongoing assessment proceedings. The petitioner highlights delays in response to show cause notices and the inability to file an appeal within the stipulated time limit under Section 107 of the Act. The petitioner argues that filing an appeal would not be an effective remedy due to ongoing assessment proceedings as per Circular 14/2022-TNGST. Consequently, the petitioner filed the writ petition seeking relief from the impugned order. Final Judgment: The Court acknowledges the petitioner's concerns but grants liberty to file an appeal against the impugned order within 30 days from receiving the court's order. The Appellate Authority is directed to entertain the appeal without insisting on the limitation aspect. The petitioner is allowed to raise all issues presented in the writ petition, including the refund of bank deposit, before the Appellate Authority, who shall decide accordingly in accordance with the law and on merits. The writ petition is dismissed with no costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
|
