M/S.Vrp Enterprises v. The Deputy Commissioner (St),
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 20.02.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY and W.M.P.Nos.6531 & 6533 of 2025 M/s.VRP Enterprises, Rep. by its Proprietor, No.122, Nadaimedai Street, Sathyamoorthy Nagar, Kundrathur, Chennai 600 069.
... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Deputy Commissioner (ST), Kanchipuram Zone, 1st Floor, Commercial Taxes Building, Collectorate Campus, Kanchipuram 631 501.
2.The Deputy State Tax Officer 1, Kundrathur Assessment Circle, Kundrathur, Chennai 600 069.
... Respondent Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order attachment to DRC07 dated 1/7
19.07.2024 passed by the 2nd respondent and consequential notice dated 29.01.2025 issued by the 1st respondent and quash the same and further direct the 1st respondent to pass denovo order. For Petitioner : Mr.J.Rajmohan For Respondent : Mr.V.Prashanth Kiran, Government Advocate
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 19.07.2024 passed by the respondent.
2. Mr.V.Prashanth Kiran, learned Government Advocate, takes notice on behalf of the respondent. By consent of the parties, the main writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that all notices/communications were uploaded by the respondent in the GST portal. Since the petitioner was not aware of the said notices, they failed to file their reply within the time. Under these circumstances, the 2/7
impugned order came to be passed by the respondent without providing any opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. Hence, this petition has been filed.
4. Further, he would submit that the respondent had already recovered 50% of the disputed tax amount from the petitioner vide bank attachment and the proof with regard to the said payment was also produced before this Court. Hence, he requests this Court to grant an opportunity to the petitioner to present their case before the respondent by setting aside the impugned order.
5. On the other hand, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent would submit that the respondent had uploaded the notices in the GST Online Portal. But the petitioner failed to avail the said opportunity. Further, he has fairly admitted that no opportunity of personal hearing was provided to the petitioner prior to the passing of impugned order. Therefore, he requested this Court to remit the matter back to the respondent.
3/7
6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate for the respondent and also perused the materials available on record.
7. In the cases on hand, it is clear that no opportunity of personal hearing was provided to the petitioner prior to the passing of impugned order. Hence, this Court is of the view that the impugned order was passed in violation of principles of natural justice since it is just and necessary to provide an opportunity to the petitioner to establish their case on merits.
8. Further, it was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondent had already recovered 50% of the disputed tax amount from the petitioner. In such view of the matter, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order dated 19.07.2024 passed by the respondent. Accordingly, this Court passes the following order:- 4/7
(i) The impugned order dated 19.07.2024 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the respondent for fresh consideration.
(ii) The petitioner shall file their reply/objection along with the required documents, if any, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
(iii) On filing of such reply/objection by the petitioner, the respondent shall consider the same and issue a 14 days clear notice, by fixing the date of personal hearing, to the petitioner and thereafter, pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, after hearing the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible.
(iv) Considering the fact that the impugned order itself has been set aside, this Court is of the opinion that the attachment made on the bank account of the petitioner cannot survive any longer and hence, it is lifted. As a sequel, the respondents are directed to instruct the concerned Bank to release the attachment, 5/7
and de-freeze the bank account of the petitioner, immediately upon the production a copy of this order.
8. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed.
20.02.2025 Speaking/Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No nsa To 1.The Deputy Commissioner (ST), Kanchipuram Zone, 1st Floor, Commercial Taxes Building, Collectorate Campus, Kanchipuram 631 501.
2.The Deputy State Tax Officer 1, Kundrathur Assessment Circle, Kundrathur, Chennai 600 069.
6/7
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY.J., nsa & W.M.P.Nos.6531 & 6533 of 2025 20.02.2025 7/7