Madras Fur Factory Private Limited v. The State Tax Officer (Fac)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 01-04-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY AND WMP NO. 13060 OF 2025,WMP NO. 13056 OF 2025 M/s.Madras Fur Factory Private Limited Represented By S. Pavan Kumar, Director, 58/e, North Phase, Sidco Industrial Estate, Ambattur, Chennai Petitioner(s) Vs The State Tax Officer (FAC) Pattarakkam Assessment Circle, Chennai Respondent(s) PRAYER:-Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records on the files of the respondent in GSTIN 33AAKCM1658D1ZN/2018-19 dated 25.04.2024, and quash the same.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.V.Srikanth For Respondent(s):
Ms.Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran, Government Advocate (t)
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking to call for the records on the files of the respondent in GSTIN 33AAKCM1658D1ZN/201819 dated 25.04.2024, and quash the same. 2.Ms.Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran, learned Government Advocate (Taxes), takes notice on behalf of the respondent. 3.By consent of the parties, the main writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.
4.Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that, in the present case, the petitioner have not received any physical copy of the show cause notice and also personal hearing notice. The show cause notice dated
28.01.2024 was uploaded in the GST Portal and the petitioner had no ocassion to open the GST Portal. Even the impugned order dated 25.04.2024 was also uploaded in the GST portal, which is violation of principle of natural justice. He would further submit that the petitioner is ready and willing to pay 25% of the disputed tax demand in respect of the impugned assessment period and prayed to set aside the impugned order directing the respondent to permit the petitioner to file their reply and provide an opportunity of personal hearing so that the petitioner would be able to substantiate their case. 5.Learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent would submit that as per the voluntary submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, subject to the deposit of 25% of the disputed tax demand by the petitioner in respect of the impugned assessment period, if the Court feels it appropriate and it is a fit case for re-consideration, this Court may consider and pass orders.
6.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Advocate appearing for respondent and perused the materials available on record.
7.Considering the above submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and upon perusal of the materials, it is evident that the impugned show cause notice was issued through the GST Portal Tab. According to the petitioner, the petitioner's accountant was not aware of the issuance of the show cause notice issued through the GST Portal and the original of the said show cause notice was not furnished to them. When such being the case, this Court feels that when the respondent did not receive any reply/response from the petitioner for the show causes notice and when the statute provide alternative mode for sending notices, it is a bounden duty of the respondent to choose an other effective mode of service instead of uploading the notice on the common portal again and again. When such exercise is being carried out, the petitioner would have not come with the plea before his Court that they have not received any notices.
8.Thus, in such circumstances, this Court is of the view that the impugned order came to be passed without affording opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner to establish their case, thereby violating the principles of natural justice and that it is just and necessary to provide an opportunity to the petitioner to establish their case on merits and in accordance with law. 9.For the reasons stated above, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order dated 25.04.2024 passed by the respondent. Accordingly, this Court passes the following order:- (i) The order impugned herein is set aside on condition that the petitioner deposits 25% of the disputed tax amount in respect of the impugned assessment period, as agreed by the petitioner, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
(ii) The petitioner shall file their reply/objection along with the required documents, if any, within a period of two weeks thereafter.
(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.
10.With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. There is no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
01-04-2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes rst
To The State Tax Officer (fac) Pattarakkam Assessment Circle, Chennai
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY J.
rst AND WMP NO. 13060 OF 2025, WMP NO. 13056 OF 2025 01-04-2025