9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 1085X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tution of India, the petitioner has assailed an ex-parte assessment order dated 15.05.2023 passed by the third respondent, namely, the Assistant Commissioner, Circle-I, Jaipur I Ward-II, Commercial Taxes Department, Jaipur. The petitioner has sought declaration that his statutory return in Form GSTR-3B for the month of March, 2023 is valid and the declaration made therein by the petitioner holds primacy over the determination of liability in best judgment assessment. A prayer has also been made to de-attach the bank account of the petitioner. The petitioner has also prayed for declaration that Section 16(2), 39 read with Sections 46 & 47 of the GST Act permit filing of a monthly return after the due date. 3. Learned counsel for the petitio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etermination of tax under best judgment assessment is not in accord with the return filed by the petitioner, we find that the petitioner, right from the beginning, has been a defaulter. Firstly, he did not file his return under Section 39 in Form GSTR-3B for the period of March, 2023, even though he was served with a notice under Section 46 of the RGST Act, 2017 requiring him to file his return in the Form GSTR-3B for March, 2023 within 15 days. The petitioner again remained negligent and did not care to file his return within a period of 15 days as per notice dated 27.04.2023. In such circumstances, the Assessing Authority was left with no option but to proceed to make best judgment assessment, as provided under Section 62 of the RGST Act, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mer Health Care Limited (supra), the question which arose for consideration was whether the High Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, ought to entertain a challenge to the assessment order on the sole ground that the statutory remedy of appeal against that order stood foreclosed by law of limitation. On facts, that was a case where the assessee did not take recourse to remedy of appeal even though he was duly served with the order of assessment within the statutory period. Without challenging the order in appeal, respondent therein filed an application under Rule 60 of the Andhra Pradesh Value Added Tax Rules, 2005, highlighting certain errors in raising the demand based on incorrect tur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rve that this decision is on the facts of that case and cannot be cited as a precedent in support of an argument that the High Court is free to entertain the writ petition assailing the assessment order even if filed beyond the statutory period of maximum 60 days in filing appeal. The remedy of appeal is creature of statute. If the appeal is presented by the assessee beyond the extended statutory limitation period of 60 days in terms of Section 31 of the 2005 Act and is, therefore, not entertained, it is incomprehensible as to how it would become a case of violation of fundamental right, much less statutory or legal right as such. 23. Arguendo, reverting to the factual matrix of the present case, it is noticed that the respondent had asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... month of July, 2018, which presupposes that the respondent must have become aware about the assessment order, at least in July, 2018. In the same affidavit, it is asserted that the respondent Company was not aware about the assessment order, as it was not brought to its notice by the employee concerned due to his negligence. The respondent in the writ petition has averred that the appeal was rejected by the appellate authority on the ground that it had no power to condone the delay beyond 30 days, when in fact, the order examines the cause set out by the respondent and concludes that the same was unsubstantiated by the respondent. That finding has not been examined by the High Court in the impugned judgment and order at all, but the High Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the matter, therefore, the High Court ought not to have entertained the subject writ petition filed by the respondent herein. The same deserved to be rejected at the threshold." 10. Present is a case where the petitioner did not even file the appeal and allowed the order passed in assessment to become final and then filed writ petition seeking to challenge the determination through best judgment assessment, mainly on the basis of incorrect determination of tax liability in the light of return belatedly filed by the petitioner. Present is not a case where from the date of notice, return was either filed within the prescribed period, or even within the extended period under notice given to the petitioner. Even best judgment assessment was no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
