2024 (3) TMI 548 - HC - GST

Levy of Penalty u/s 73 - non willful mis-statement - discrepancies found on the returns - Validity of notice uploaded in the common portal and not communicated physically - Works contractor registered with the GST Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - The petitioner's contention is that he is having all the required documents to substantiate that there is no discrepancy and he is ready to submit the same. The learned counsel has relied on the order of the Division Bench of the Gujrat High Court, wherein, it was held that show-case notice and other related orders in physical form shall be dispatched to the dealers by RPAD, till the technical glitches are cured. Since the petitioner is ready to produce all the necessary documents, the respondent is also inclined to provide one more opportunity to the petitioner. Thus, this writ petition is allowed. The order impugned in this writ petition is set aside and the issue is remanded back to the respondent for fresh consideration.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in this case include discrepancies found on the returns filed by the petitioner for the assessment year 2022-2023, imposition of penalty on the petitioner for non-willful misstatement under Section 73 of TNGST Act, 2017, lack of physical communication of notice and orders to the petitioner, and the petitioner's readiness to submit required documents to substantiate their claim.

Summary:

Issue 1 - Discrepancies on returns and imposition of penalty:
The petitioner, a works contractor registered under the GST Act, 2017, faced discrepancies on the returns filed for the assessment year 2022-2023. Consequently, a notice was issued by the respondent imposing a penalty on the petitioner for non-willful misstatement. The petitioner challenged this order through a writ petition.

Issue 2 - Lack of physical communication of notice and orders:
The petitioner argued that the notice and the impugned order were issued through the portal without physical communication, leading to the petitioner being unaware of the same until February 2024. The petitioner contended that they possess the necessary documents to refute the discrepancies and are willing to produce them before the respondent.

Judgment:
Upon considering the submissions, the Court found merit in the petitioner's contentions. Citing the precedent set by the Division Bench of the Gujarat High Court, which emphasized the physical dispatch of show-cause notices and orders, the Court allowed the writ petition. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded back to the respondent for fresh consideration. The petitioner was directed to appear before the respondent with the required documents on 05.03.2024. The respondent was instructed to review the documents and pass fresh orders promptly. No costs were awarded, and connected Miscellaneous Petitions were closed.