S Selvi v. The Assistant Commissioner (St)
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.07.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN W.P.(MD) Nos.16141 to 16145 of 2024 and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.14028, 14031, 14026, 14027, 14029, 14030, 14044, 14045, 14033 and 14034 of 2024 S.Selvi ... Petitioner in all W.Ps., /vs./ The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Office of the Assistant Commissioner, Thiruverumbur Assessment Circle, Trichy.
... Respondent in all W.Ps., COMMON PRAYER: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the impugned order in GSTIN - 33AARPS1222K1ZK/2017-18, 33AARPS1222K1ZK/2018-19, 33AARPS1222K1ZK/2019-20, 33AARPS1222K1ZK/2020-21 and 33AARPS1222K1ZK/2021-22 dated 12.02.2024 along with DRC-07 in Ref Nos.ZD330224080523Q, ZD330224080637F, ZD330224129072Z, 1/6
ZD330224128595I and ZD330224128536M dated 14.02.2024 and 22.02.2024, passed by the Respondent and quash the same as arbitrary. For Petitioner in all W.Ps., : Mr.S.Muthuvenkatraman For Respondent in all W.Ps., : Mr.R.Suresh Kumar Additional Government Pleader COMMON ORDER By this common order, all these writ petitions are being disposed of without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, after dispensing with the counter in the respective writ petitions and after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondent. 2.The petitioner has challenged the following assessment orders: S.No Writ Petition Assessment Order Date of the impugned order W.P.(MD) No.16141 of 2024 GSTIN-33AARPS1222K1ZK/2017-18 12.02.2024 W.P.(MD) No.16142 of 2024 GSTIN-33AARPS1222K1ZK/2018-19 12.02.2024 W.P.(MD) No.16143 of 2024 GSTIN-33AARPS1222K1ZK/2019-20 12.02.2024 W.P.(MD) No.16144 of 2024 GSTIN-33AARPS1222K1ZK/2020-21 12.02.2024 W.P.(MD) No.16145 of 2024 GSTIN-33AARPS1222K1ZK/2021-22 12.02.2024 2/6
3.The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner's husband was running a business in the name and style of Sri Rajeswari Industries in Trichy and that the petitioner's husband passed away on 20.12.2022. 4.It is submitted that this was also brought to the knowledge of the respondent on 26.10.2023, when the audit was being conducted. Despite the same, notice was sent in the name of the proprietary concern of the petitioner's husband, who has died on 20.12.2022.
5.It is submitted that the petitioner is a septuagenarian and is aged about 71 years and that she is not continuing with the business that was carried out by the petitioner's husband and therefore, the impugned order seeking to recover the tax from the petitioner as also the deceased husband is without any merits. 6.The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondent would submit that the submission that the impugned order was passed against a proprietary concern of the petitioner's deceased husband is non est in law and is therefore liable to be quashed cannot be countenanced, as the 3/6
petitioner has replied in the letterhead of the said proprietary concern, indicating that the petitioner was carrying on the business of her husband in the said proprietary concern.
7.The response of the petitioner dated 09.09.2023 to the respondent is on the letterhead of the proprietary concern, namely Sri Rajeswari Industries. The petitioner appears to have replied to the respondent on the letterhead of the proprietary concern implying as if the petitioner was carrying on the business of her late husband, namely Sundaramurthy, who has died on 20.12.2022. 8.Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondent, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned orders and remit the cases back to the respondent to pass a fresh order on merits and in accordance with law. The petitioner shall file a reply to the notices that preceded the impugned orders. 9.It is open for the petitioner to explain as to how Section 93 of the respective GST enactment are not applicable to the petitioner. It is expected that 4/6
the petitioner will give a consolidated reply by treating the impugned orders as addendum to the show cause notices that preceded the impugned orders for the respective assessment years within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The respondent shall thereafter consider the same and pass fresh orders in the light of the cancellation of the registration on 09.09.2023 within a period of 3 months thereafter. The petitioner shall also be heard before fresh orders are passed.
10.The writ petitions stand allowed, accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. Index : Yes / No 19.07.2024 Internet : Yes / No mm To The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Office of the Assistant Commissioner, Thiruverumbur Assessment Circle, Trichy.
5/6
C.SARAVANAN, J.
mm W.P.(MD) Nos.16141 to 16145 of 2024 19.07.2024 6/6