HC Set-aside Order Passed by GST Officer as Assessee Was Unaware of Proceedings & Matter Was Remanded for Reconsideration

Case Details: Nagaraj Sangiah v. Superintendent of GST & Central Excise (Grp-IV) - [2024] 162 taxmann.com 301 (Madras)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• • Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, J.
  • B. Sivaraman for the Petitioner.
  • Rajinish Pathyil, Sr. SC for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner was a trader and it received notice from the GST department for difference between GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B and also for auto populated GSTR-2A. The petitioner didn’t participate in the proceedings and the department passed an order-in-original (OIO) against the petitioner. It filed writ petition against the OIO and contended that it was unaware of proceedings culminating in impugned order.

High Court Held

The Honorable High Court noted that the impugned order was passed on the ground that the petitioner had not participated in the proceedings. Therefore, it would be just and necessary that the petitioner would be provided an opportunity to contest the tax demand by putting the petitioner on terms.

Thus, the Court held that the impugned order was to be set aside on condition that the petitioner remitted an aggregate sum of Rs. 15,00,000 towards the disputed tax demand within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The Court also directed the department to provide a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, including a personal hearing, and thereafter issue a fresh order within three months.