Validity of SCN Can’t be Challenged Merely Because SCN Issued Did Not Refer to a Particular Statutory Provision | HC

Case Details: Global Plasto Wares v. Assistant State tax Officer - [2023] 157 taxmann.com 184 (Kerala)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• • Dr A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar & Dr Kauser Edappagath, JJ.

Facts of the Case

In the present case, the adverse order was passed against assessee imposing penalty under Section 73(11) on grounds that entire tax dues were not paid within 30 days from date of show cause notice. The assessee filed petition against the order which was dismissed by Single Judge on ground that assessee had not paid tax collected from its customers to department and differential tax was paid only when same was demanded from it.

It filed appeal against the decision of Single judge and submitted that notice issued to assessee mentioned only possibility of a penalty under Section 73(9) and, therefore, it was not open to Assessing Authority to travel beyond SCN and impose penalty under Section 73(11).

High Court Held

The Honorable High Court noted that while paying tax due to State along with returns filed, the assessee had failed to include tax amounts covered by several invoices which were considered by Assessing Authority for issuance of demand for differential tax.

Under those circumstances, the demand for differential tax came to be made against assessee and the assessee could not be said to have been prejudiced merely because SCN did not refer to a particular statutory provision when facts leading to invocation of statutory provision concerned were admitted by assessee. Therefore, the appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed.