Dept. Should Consider Assessee’s Representation to Extend Time for Making Payment Since Recovery Notice Was Issued | HC

Case Details: ACP Business Enterprises (P.) Ltd. v. Secretary to Government - [2024] 159 taxmann.com 464 (Madras)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, J.
• A. Dhamodaran for the TNC.Kaushik
• TNC. Kaushik for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

In the present case, the petitioner received a notice from the Revenue Authority demanding payment towards tax dues. The petitioner submitted a representation to the Revenue Authority requesting a 90-day extension for making payment and also sought revocation of the attachment of their bank accounts. It filed petition seeking consideration of its representation and contended that the proper officer had discretion to extend time for making payment under Section 79(1)(c)(iv) of the CGST Act, 2017.

High Court Held

The Madras High Court noted that the proper officer has the discretion to extend the time for making payment under Section 79(1)(c)(iv) and if a notice for recovery has been issued under Section 79(1)(c)(i) then the proper officer can extend the time for making payment.

Therefore, the Court directed the Revenue Authority to consider the petitioner’s representation and dispose of it within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The Court also allowed the petitioner to request the proper officer to lift the attachment of their bank account upon such terms as the officer may impose.