2020 (7) TMI 445 - HC - GST

Legality and Validity of notice of intimation under Section 74(5) of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 of the amount of tax - HELD THAT - A writ application challenging the notice of intimation in the FORM GST DRC-01A issued under Section 74(5) of the Act is not maintainable in law. It is just an intimation. It is up to the writ applicant whether to pay attention to such intimation or not. If the writ applicant deems fit to ignore it, the same may entail the consequence of further show cause notice under Section 74(1) of the Act, 2017. In any view of the matter, even if a further notice under Section 74(1) of the Act, 2017 is issued, an opportunity of hearing will definitely be given to the writ applicant before his actual liability is determined under the Act, 2017. Application rejected.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to notice of intimation under Section 74(5) of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.

Analysis:
The writ applicant, a company incorporated under The Companies Act, 1956, sought relief through a writ petition challenging a notice of intimation under Section 74(5) of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The impugned notice, issued by respondent No.2 in FORM GST DRC-01A dated 03.03.2020, informed the applicant of a liability amounting to ?80,69,313. The applicant was also warned of the possibility of a show cause notice under Section 74(1) of the Act if the amount was not paid. The counsel for the applicant argued that the communication under Section 74(5) was illegal and raised concerns about unauthorized access to business premises under Section 71 of the Act. However, the court clarified that only the legality and validity of the notice of intimation under Section 74(5) was under challenge, not the access issue under Section 71.

Upon review of the arguments and evidence, the court held that a writ application challenging the notice of intimation in FORM GST DRC-01A under Section 74(5) was not maintainable in law. The court emphasized that the notice was merely an intimation, and it was within the applicant's discretion to act on it. Ignoring the intimation might lead to a show cause notice under Section 74(1) of the Act, but the applicant would have an opportunity for a hearing before any final determination of liability. Consequently, the court rejected the writ application, stating that it failed in challenging the notice of intimation under Section 74(5) of the Act.

In conclusion, the court dismissed the writ application, emphasizing that the notice of intimation under Section 74(5) of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 was not subject to challenge through a writ petition. The court clarified that the notice served as an intimation, and any further action, such as a show cause notice under Section 74(1), would provide the applicant with an opportunity for a hearing before final liability determination.