2025 (7) TMI 980 - HC - GST

Maintainability of petition - availability of alternative remedy - petitioner s reply has not been considered - Violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - The petitioner having slept over his rights under Section 106 of the Goods and Services Tax Act shall deposit over and above 10% that is contemplated under Section 107 of the Goods and Services Tax Act. In other words the petitioner shall pay 20% of the tax confirmed vide impugned order within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition stands dismissed with the above liberty. In case the petitioner failed to comply with the above stipulations the respondents are at liberty to proceed further in furtherance of the impugned order as if the above liberty was not given to the petitioner.

Summary

The Madras High Court, through Justice C. Saravanan, dismissed the writ petition challenging the impugned order dated 17.12.2024, which held the petitioner liable for arrears of Rs. 64,65,506/- including tax, interest, and penalty. The petitioner contended that their reply was not considered, rendering the order arbitrary and violative of natural justice. The respondents countered that the order was detailed and took into account the petitioner's reply and personal hearing submissions.The Court noted the petitioner's delay in filing a statutory appeal under the Goods and Services Tax Act but, considering the circumstances, granted relief on terms: the petitioner must deposit 20% of the confirmed tax within 15 days and file an appeal before the appellate authority, which shall decide the matter on merits "without reference to the limitation." Failure to comply would allow respondents to proceed as if no relief was granted. The Court emphasized the petitioner's rights under Sections 106 and 107 of the GST Act and dismissed the petition "with the above liberty," imposing no costs.