HC Remanded Matter as AO Failed to Consider Evidence That Invoice Value for Medicines Didn’t Include Taxes

Case Details: Erode Medical Centre v. State Tax Officer-2 [2024] 164 taxmann.com 680 (Madras)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, J.
• G. Natrajan for the Petitioner.
• C. Harsha Raj, Addl. Govt. Pleader (T), for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner was engaged in providing health services and had received intimation and show cause notice from the department. It submitted reply but the department issued order under Section 76 demanding tax on alleged collection and non-remittance. It filed writ petition against the demand order and contended that the department failed to consider materials placed on record.

High Court Held

The Honorable High Court noted that the first tax proposal related to the alleged collection of taxes by the petitioner in respect of sale of medicines and non-remittance thereof to the Government. The petitioner submitted that no representation, express or implied, was made in invoices to the effect that the invoice value includes tax. The Court also noted that the second issue related to tax on premises owned by the petitioner but the reply in respect thereof was not taken into consideration.

The Court further noted that the legal issue as to whether an implied representation would be sufficient for purposes of sub-section (1) of Section 76 is also an aspect to be considered. Therefore, the Court held that the matter required reconsideration and the Court directed the department to issue fresh order after giving reasonable opportunity and personal hearing to assessee.