2024 (7) TMI 604 - HC - GST

Challenge to assessment order - difference between the input tax credit claimed in the returns filed by the petitioner in Form GSTR - 3B and auto-populated information in Form GSTR - 2A - reply of the petitioner has not been considered in the impugned order - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - The petitioner can be given a partial relief by permitting him to file a statutory appeal before the Appellate Authority. Therefore, a liberty is given to the petitioner to file a statutory appeal before the Appellate Authority, subject to the petitioner pre-depositing 25% of the disputed tax with the respondent, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that pre-deposit and the proposed appeal should be made/filed within the aforesaid period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Subject to the compliance of the same, the appeal of the petitioner shall be entertained and disposed of on merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within period of six (6) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to impugned order dated 08.05.2023 for Assessment Year 2019-2020. Consideration of petitioner's reply in the impugned order. Discrepancy in input tax credit claimed in returns and auto-populated information. Opposition based on time-barred filing. Reliance on Supreme Court decisions for dismissal. Relief granted for filing a statutory appeal with pre-deposit.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the impugned order dated 08.05.2023 for the Assessment Year 2019-2020, claiming that their reply to a prior notice was not considered. They argued that the actual difference in input tax credit claimed in returns and auto-populated information was significantly lower than what was concluded in the impugned order. The petitioner sought another opportunity to rectify this discrepancy, emphasizing the need for fair consideration of the actual figures.

The opposition to the Writ Petition was based on the contention that it was time-barred, as the impugned order was issued much earlier than the filing date of the petition. The learned Additional Government Pleader cited the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in support of this argument and urged for the dismissal of the petition on this ground.

After considering the arguments from both sides, the judge decided to grant partial relief to the petitioner by allowing them to file a statutory appeal before the Appellate Authority. The petitioner was directed to pre-deposit 25% of the disputed tax amount with the respondent within 30 days of receiving the order. The judge emphasized that the appeal should be filed within the same 30-day period and assured that the appeal would be heard and decided on its merits within six months from the date of the order. The Writ Petition was disposed of with these instructions, and no costs were imposed, with connected Miscellaneous Petitions being closed accordingly.