HC Remanded Matter as Assessee Was Unaware of Order Confirming Demand Due to Accountant’s Failure to Inform About Notice

Case Details: Diamong Cargo Movers v. State Tax Officer II - [2024] 167 taxmann.com 417 (Madras)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• C. Saravanan, J.
• S. Karunakar, Adv. for the Petitioner.
• J.K. Jayaselan, Government Adv. for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner was aggrieved by the demand order passed by the GST department. It filed writ petition against the demand order and contended that the accountant of petitioner had failed to inform it about the notices that preceded the impugned orders and only after the department insisted on the petitioner paying disputed tax, the petitioner became aware of the impugned orders.

High Court Held

The Honorable High Court noted that the petitioner failed to take advantage of the show cause notices issued by the department before the impugned orders were passed. However, the Court held that the petitioner can be given an opportunity to ventilate his grievance before the department. Therefore, the Court set aside the demand order and remitted the matter back to the department for fresh adjudication. Also, the petitioner shall deposit 25% disputed tax and file a consolidated reply within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

List of Cases Referred to

• Singh Enterprises v. CCE (2008) 3 SCC 70 (para 4).