2024 (6) TMI 1248 - HC - GST

Violation of principles of natural justice - petitioner was unaware of the notice that preceded the impugned order as also the impugned order that can be passed on 23.06.2023 - HELD THAT - Considering the fact that the impugned order has been passed against the petitioner without giving an opportunity to the petitioner to reply the show cause notice, the impugned order is quashed and the matter is remitted back to the respondent. The petitioner is at liberty to file a reply to the show cause notice subject to the petitioner depositing 10% of disputed tax within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In case the aforesaid sum of Rs. 22,83,579/- has already been recovered, there shall be no further recovery, pending further orders regarding the demand proceedings. Petition disposed off by way of remand.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to impugned order under TNGST Act, 2017 for assessment year 2018-19.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged an order passed under Section 73 of the TNGST Act, 2017 for the assessment year 2018-19, claiming unawareness of the notice and subsequent order. The petitioner highlighted the recovery of a significant portion of the tax liability by the respondent, expressing concern over potential coercive recovery methods. However, the petitioner failed to provide copies of relevant financial records. The Court acknowledged the lack of opportunity for the petitioner to respond to the show cause notice before the order was issued, leading to the quashing of the impugned order. The matter was remitted back to the respondent, allowing the petitioner to reply to the notice upon depositing 10% of the disputed tax amount within 30 days. If the recovered sum had already been paid, no further recovery was permitted until future orders. The quashed order was to be treated as an addendum to the show cause notice, and the respondent was directed to issue fresh orders based on merits and in compliance with the law, ensuring the petitioner's right to be heard.

This detailed analysis covers the petitioner's challenge to the impugned order, the concerns raised regarding recovery methods, the Court's decision to quash the order due to lack of opportunity for response, the conditions imposed for the petitioner to reply to the notice, and the directions for the respondent to issue fresh orders following due process and within a specified timeframe.