9911796707
TMI BlogULTERIOR MOTIVEX X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ULTERIOR MOTIVE X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tal would be sufficient compliance of law. The core issue is not that the Section 169 (1)(d) is effectively complied but the SCN is not EFFECTIVELY Served on the taxpayer. 2. The High Court of Madras in the case of M/S. POOMIKA INFRA DEVELOPERS, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR K.S. UDHAYASHANKAR VERSUS STATE TAX OFFICER AND M/S. MV CREATIONS REP BY ITS PROPRIETOR MADAPPAN VENKATESWARAN VERSUS THE A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST) (FAC), THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST), THE STATE TAX OFFICER, (AUDIT), JOINT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAX, THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAX, (APPEAL), SALEM - 2025 (4) TMI 1308 - MADRAS HIGH COURT has only concluded that by merely posting the SCN in GST Portal, the law is complied. When it was suggested by the High Court to either send SMS or e mail on u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ploading the SCN in portal, Revenue vehemently opposed such move with ULTERIOR MOTIVE despite being aware of the fact that the SCN is NOT EFFECTIVELY SERVED on the assessee. 3. The High Court of Madras made an attempt to convince Revenue on the need to either send sms or e mail as similar provisions are available in Income Tax Act, this was opposed by Revenue as their sole objective appears to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... only raising the DEMANDS to improve the STATISTICS on DEMAND, despite knowing the fact that many ex party orders would be set aside by GSTAT (If at all GSTAT is established) or by the Jurisdictional Hich Court. 4. The fact that MERE ensuring compliance of Section 169 (1) (d) without ensuring that SCN is effectively served on the taxpayer violates the provisions contained in Section 75(4) a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s well as 75(5) which are fundamental rights of the taxpayer. 5. Section 75(4) grants the right for personal hearing while Section 75(5) is on adjournments under justifiable grounds. The Adjudication Authority, while passing an ex party order (WITH ULTERIOR MOTIVE) fails to understand that the ex party order is passed in GROSS VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 6. Incidentally the High ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court of Madras in the case of M/s. AXIOM GEN NXT India Private Limited in W P No 1114 of 2025 vide order dated 22/04/2025 has completely and comprehensively addressed this issue. 7. The High Court vide para 38 has observed that uploading SCN on portal may be sufficient compliance of Section 169(1)(d) but the mode of service is not EFFECTIVE as it results in ex party orders. 8. Para 39 of order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 22/04/2025 is path breaking. The High Court has strongly suggested to pass orders only after effective communication of SCN to the taxpayer by way of reminders through RPAD so that the time and efforts which are wasted by assessee, Adjudicating Authority as well as that of the Jurisdictional High Courts are all saved. 9. The High Court went on further to conclude that passing of an ex party ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order will only be considered an empty formality by which no useful purpose was achieved. 10. In fact, vide para 40 of the order, the High Court has RESOLVED the CRUCIAL issue of violation of PRINCIPLERS OF NATURAL JUSTICE. This suggestion of the High Court to send reminder on SCN by RPAD before passing any ex party order only saves the Adjudicating Authority as the Tax Payer is not in a positio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n to claim that he was not aware of the SCN. 11. It is high time that at lease after this order of High Court, there should not be any more ex party adjudication orders WITHOUT ENSURING EFFECTIVE SERVING OF SCN to the tax payer. 12. While the first order of the High Court dated 09/04/2025 has examined Section 169(1)(d) and suggested sms or email as an appeal to REVENUE, the order dated 22/04/202 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5 has beautifully explained the violations of several other provisions and concluded that mere compliance of section 169 (1) (d) alone is not sufficient as it defats several objectives. 13. Adjudication Authorities must be aware of the order of the High Court of Madras dated 22/04/2025 discussed above to ensure that futile exercise of passing ex party orders must end. 14. This is High Time that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CBIC issues instructions to field formation based on the order of the High Court of Madras in the case of AXIOM GEN NXT INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED to ensure that the suggestions of the HIGH COURT reaches everyone connected with the issue in the best interest of JUSTICE to the TAX PAYER as well as to stop wasting the PRECIOUS TIME OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURTS. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... haring by authors, experts, professionals ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
