2024 (7) TMI 855 - HC - GST

Challenge to best judgment assessment order passed by the assessing authority under Section 62 of the CGST/SGST Act - cancellation of registration - failure to submit returns for more than six months - HELD THAT - The non filing of returns by the appellant, even after receipt of Ext.P4 assessment order, and within thirty days thereafter, is fatal to the case of the appellant. While it may be true that the respondents did not issue a formal notice as required under Section 62(1) of the Act before completing the assessment on best judgment basis under the said provision, the fact remains that the appellant could have obtained a nullification of the said assessment order, if he had filed the return at least within thirty days of the receipt of the assessment order. It is not in dispute that the appellant received the assessment order. It is also not in dispute that within thirty days thereafter, he did not file his returns. The appellant has only itself to blame for the predicament that it finds itself in, since the statutory provisions grant sufficient opportunities to an assessee to ensure that an assessment is completed, as far as possible, based on the returns filed by the assessee. There are no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge - appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Challenge against best judgment assessment order under Section 62 of the CGST/SGST Act.
2. Compliance with notice requirement prior to passing the order on best judgment basis.
3. Non-filing of returns by the appellant.
4. Appellant's awareness of statutory requirements.
5. Appellant's opportunity to nullify the assessment order.
6. Appellant's failure to cooperate in assessment proceedings.

Analysis:

1. The appellant challenged the best judgment assessment order under Section 62 of the CGST/SGST Act. The appellant, a registered dealer, failed to submit returns for over six months, leading to steps for cancellation of registration and completion of assessment on best judgment basis. The appellant did not avail the opportunity to file a return within thirty days of receiving the assessment order, which could have resulted in automatic cancellation of the assessment order.

2. The appellant contended that the respondents did not comply with the requirement of issuing a notice before passing the best judgment assessment order under Section 62(1) of the Act. The appellant, being a new venture, claimed unawareness of filing returns and consequences of non-compliance.

3. The non-filing of returns by the appellant, even after receiving the assessment order, was highlighted as fatal to the case. The failure to file returns within thirty days of receiving the order was deemed detrimental to the appellant's position. The court noted that the appellant had the opportunity to nullify the assessment order by filing returns but failed to do so.

4. The court emphasized that while the formal notice requirement under Section 62(1) was not met, the appellant's failure to take positive steps, such as filing returns, indicated non-cooperation in the assessment proceedings. The appellant's lack of action within the specified timeframe was seen as a self-inflicted predicament.

5. Ultimately, the court dismissed the writ appeal, stating that the appellant had only itself to blame for the situation due to the failure to utilize the opportunities provided by statutory provisions. The judgment of the learned Single Judge was upheld, emphasizing the importance of compliance and cooperation in assessment processes.