2024 (7) TMI 169 - HC - GST

Maintainability of petition - time limitation - Section 107 of the TNGST Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - This Court is of the view that the petitioner may have a case on merits and therefore, discretion is exercised in favour of the petitioner and quashed the impugned order, subject to the petitioner depositing 10% of disputed tax to the credit of the respondent within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. The impugned order, which stands quashed, shall be treated as addendum to the show cause notice that preceded the impugned order - Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Petitioner aggrieved by impugned order for assessment year 2019-20.
2. Failure of petitioner to appear for personal hearing and produce supportive documents.
3. Petitioner's claim of being unaware of notices and impugned order.
4. Opposition by Government Advocate citing time bar for Writ Petition and appellate remedy.
5. Court's consideration of arguments and decision to quash impugned order subject to conditions.

Analysis:

1. The petitioner was aggrieved by an impugned order dated 18.10.2023 for the assessment year 2019-20, which followed notices in Form GST ASMT-10 and Form GST DRC 01. Despite three personal hearing notices sent on different dates, the petitioner failed to attend the hearings or provide necessary documents, leading to the passing of the impugned order based on available materials.

2. The petitioner claimed to be a small scale operator unaware of the notices posted on the GST common portal and the impugned order being sent through the same platform. However, the Government Advocate opposed this claim, citing the Writ Petition as time-barred and liable for dismissal due to delays, referencing a Supreme Court decision.

3. The Government Advocate further argued that the appellate remedy was also time-barred under Section 107 of the TNGST Act, 2017, based on previous Supreme Court rulings. Despite these objections, the Court considered the petitioner's case on merits and exercised discretion in favor of the petitioner, quashing the impugned order subject to a condition of depositing 10% of disputed tax within 30 days.

4. The quashed impugned order was to be treated as an addendum to the show cause notice preceding it, with the petitioner expected to file a reply within 30 days. The respondent was directed to pass fresh orders expeditiously and in accordance with the law, preferably within three months, after the deposit was made. The petitioner's right to be heard before the new order was emphasized.

5. The Writ Petition was disposed of with the above directions, without any costs incurred. The connected miscellaneous petitions were closed as a result of this judgment.