Ffl Ventures Llp v. State Tax Officer
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08.04.2025 Coram The Honourable Mr.Justice Krishnan Ramasamy and W.M.P.Nos.14001 & 14002 of 2025 FFL Ventures LLP, A Limited Liability Partnership incorporated under the Limited Liability Partnership Act, 2008, Represented by its designated partnership Mrs.T.Laxmi, Having registered office at:
12th floor, A 127, Ankur Palm Springs, New No.4C, TH Road, Padi, Chennai-600 050.
...Petitioner
Vs.
1. State Tax Officer, Padi Assessment Circle, Room No.426, Integrated Commercial Taxes Building, Nandanam, Chennai-600 035.
2. Assistant Commissioner (ST), Padi Assessment Circle, Room No.426, Integrated Commercial Taxes Building, 1/8
Nandanam, Chennai-600 035.
...Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records in respect of the impugned order bearing number ZD330724069992Y dated 05.07.2024 issued by the 1st Respondent, quash the same and further direct the 1st respondent to pass orders afresh after affording an opportunity to the petitioner to file its response with supporting documents.
For Petitioner : Ms.Nivedha Mohan For R1 : Mr.V.Prashanth Kiran Government Advocate (Tax) Order Mr.V.Prashanth Kiran, learned Government Advocate (Tax), who takes notice on behalf of the first respondent. With consent, the main Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.
2. The challenge in this Writ Petition is to the order dated 05.07.2024 passed by the 1st respondent for the AY 2019-20 and to quash the same and further direct the 1st respondent to pass orders afresh after affording an 2/8
opportunity to the petitioner to file its response with supporting documents.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the first respondent has issued a show cause notice in Form DRC 01 on 21.11.2023 and reminder notices dated 09.03.2024, 05.06.2024 and 07.06.2024 by uploading the same in the GST portal. Since the same were not served through any other mode coupled with the fact that the GST registration was also cancelled by the petitioner, the petitioner was not aware of those notices and file reply to those notices. As the petitioner failed to file reply to the said show cause notice, the first respondent has confirmed the proposals contained in the show cause notice and passed the present impugned order.
Therefore, the learned counsel would submit that the impugned order suffers from violation of principles of natural justice and is liable to be aside, as the petitioner has not been heard before passing the impugned order. 3.1.
matter back to the Authority for fresh consideration. He would further submit that there is bank attachment and the same may be lifted, subject to the payment of 25% of the disputed tax. Hence, he prayed for appropriate directions.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Taxes) for the first respondent fairly submitted that since the petitioner has voluntarily come forward to deposit 25% of the disputed tax, the prayer sought for by the petitioner may be considered.
5. 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 uploaded on the GST Portal Tab. According to the petitioner, the petitioner 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. In such circumstances, this Court is of the view that the impugned assessment order came to be passed without affording any opportunity of personal hearing to the 4/8
petitioner, confirming the proposals contained in the show cause notice. No doubt sending notice by uploading in portal is a sufficient service, but, the Officer who sending repeated reminders, inspite of the fact that no response from the petitioner to the show cause notice, the Officer should explore the possibility of sending notices by way of other modes, otherwise it will not be an effective service, rather, it would only fulfilling the empty formalities.
6. Therefore, this Court finds that there is a lack of opportunities being provided to serve the notices/orders etc., effectively to the petitioner. Hence, this Court is inclined to set-aside the impugned order by issuing the following directions:- i) The impugned order passed by the first respondent dated 05.07.2024 is set aside.
ii) Consequently, the matter is remanded to the first respondent for fresh consideration.
5/8
iii) The petitioner is granted liberty to deposit 25% of the disputed tax, which the petitioner themselves had voluntarily came forward to make such payment, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
iv) Thereafter, the petitioner is directed to file a reply along with supportive documents within a period of two weeks. v) Thereupon, the first respondent is directed to consider the reply and shall issue a clear 14 days notice affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and shall decide the matter in accordance with law. vi) Upon production of proof with regard to the payment of 25% of the disputed tax made by the petitioner, the first respondent-Department is directed to issue appropriate direction on the petitioner's banker towards defreezure of the petitioner's bank account forthwith. 6/8
7. With the above observations & directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
08.04.2025 arr Index : yes/no To
1. State Tax Officer, Padi Assessment Circle, Room No.426, Integrated Commercial Taxes Building, Nandanam, Chennai-600 035.
2. Assistant Commissioner (ST), Padi Assessment Circle, Room No.426, Integrated Commercial Taxes Building, Nandanam, Chennai-600 035.
7/8
Krishnan Ramasamy,J., arr 08.04.2025 8/8