2024 (9) TMI 800 - HC - GST

Violation of principles of natural justice - petitioner did not have a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits - petitioner unaware of proceedings as order was not communicated through any mode other than uploading on the GST portal - difference between the petitioner s GSTR 3B returns and the GSTR 1 statement - HELD THAT - On perusal of the impugned order as contended by learned counsel for the petitioner such order pertains to the difference between the petitioner s GSTR 3B returns and the GSTR 1 statement. It is also evident that the tax proposal was confirmed in view of the petitioner s failure to reply to the show cause notice. The show cause notice discloses that a personal hearing was offered to the petitioner on 25.08.2023. Therefore the petitioner cannot be absolved of responsibility for non participation. At the same time it should be recognized that the tax proposal was confirmed only because the petitioner failed to reply. In these circumstances albeit by putting the petitioner on terms it is just and necessary to provide the petitioner an opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits. The impugned order dated 13.11.2023 is set aside subject to the condition that the petitioner remits 10% of the disputed tax demand as agreed to with in a maximum period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner is also permitted to submit a reply to the show cause notice within the aforesaid period. Petition disposed off.

Summary

The High Court set aside the order dated 13.11.2023 due to lack of opportunity for the petitioner to contest the tax demand. The petitioner agreed to remit 10% of the disputed tax demand. The court directed the respondent to provide a reasonable opportunity for the petitioner to contest the tax demand and issue a fresh assessment order within three months. The bank attachment was raised. Case W.P.No.10651 of 2024 was disposed of with no costs.