HC Remanded Matter for Fresh Consideration Since Order Wrongly Confirmed Previously Dropped Amounts

Case Details: Jesus Ginning and Raymond Seeds v. Superintendent of GST & Central Excise* [2024] 163 taxmann.com 687 (Madras)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• C. Saravanan, J.
• A. Satheesh Murugan for the Petitioner.
• R. Nandhakumar, Sr. Standing Counsel for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner was earlier issued with a notice whereby it was called upon to give explanation for the discrepancies between the return filed by the petitioner in Form GSTR-1 and in Form GSTR-3B. The petitioner replied to the same & demand was dropped. Thereafter, another notice was issued which was not replied by petitioner and the department passed order confirming demands including previously dropped amount. It filed writ petition and contended that there was violation of principles of natural justice.

High Court Held

The Honorable High Court noted that the petitioner was earlier issued a notice for discrepancies in returns and demand was dropped. Thereafter, the department issued another notice and the petitioner failed to respond. Therefore, the Court held that the department cannot be wholly blamed in the facts and circumstances of the case.

However, the amount which was dropped in the earlier proceedings was also confirmed and there was non-application of mind on this aspect. Thus, the Court held that the impugned order to be set aside and the case was remitted back to the department to pass a fresh order on merits and in accordance with law. The Court also directed the petitioner to deposit 10% of the disputed tax.