Facts of the Case
The petitioner, Tvl Sugam Pharmacy, challenged the
order dated 05.02.2026 whereby the State Tax Officer rejected its
rectification application filed under Section 161 of the Tamil Nadu Goods
and Services Tax Act, 2017. The dispute originated from a Show Cause Notice
alleging discrepancies relating to the claim of ineligible Input Tax Credit
(ITC) and the levy of late fee for delayed filing of GSTR-1.
As the petitioner failed to participate in the assessment
proceedings, an ex parte assessment order under Section 73 was passed on
18.09.2025. Subsequently, the rectification application was rejected,
and the appeal before the Appellate Authority was also dismissed on 20.02.2026.
The petitioner approached the Madras High Court seeking quashing of the rectification order and, during the hearing, sought permission to challenge all three orders.
Issues Involved
- Whether
the rejection of the rectification application under Section 161 was
legally sustainable.
- Whether
the High Court could interfere with an ex parte assessment order passed
under Section 73 despite dismissal of the statutory appeal.
- Whether
the petitioner deserved another opportunity to produce evidence and defend
its claim.
- Whether the assessment, rectification, and appellate orders could be set aside subject to suitable conditions.
Petitioner's Arguments
- The
petitioner submitted that it could not participate in the assessment
proceedings due to the reasons explained in the affidavit.
- It
was contended that, if another opportunity were granted, the petitioner
would file a detailed reply together with all supporting documents
substantiating its Input Tax Credit claim.
- During the hearing, the petitioner also sought permission to challenge the original assessment order and the appellate order in addition to the rectification order.
Respondent's Arguments
- The
Revenue submitted that the petitioner neither appeared before the
Assessing Authority nor filed the appeal within the prescribed limitation
period.
- It
was argued that the assessment order and the appellate order had attained
finality.
- The respondents further contended that the writ petition initially challenged only the rectification order and not the assessment or appellate orders.
Court Order / Findings
The Madras High Court observed that, considering the
explanation offered by the petitioner and its readiness to participate in fresh
proceedings, one more opportunity could be granted in the interest of justice.
Accordingly, the Court:
- Permitted
the petitioner to challenge all the three orders.
- Directed
the petitioner to deposit 25% of the disputed tax within four
weeks.
- Ordered
that, upon such deposit, the following orders shall stand set aside:
- Assessment
order passed under Section 73 dated 18.09.2025.
- Rectification
order passed under Section 161 dated 05.02.2026.
- Appellate
order dated 20.02.2026.
- Remanded
the matter back to the Assessing Authority.
- Granted
liberty to the petitioner to submit a detailed reply along with supporting
documents.
- Directed the Assessing Authority to consider the reply and pass a fresh order in accordance with law after providing due opportunity.
Important Clarification
- The
High Court reaffirmed that, in appropriate cases, even ex parte GST
assessment orders may be set aside to ensure substantial justice.
- Relief
was granted only after imposing the condition of depositing 25% of the
disputed tax, thereby balancing the interests of both the taxpayer and
the Revenue.
- The judgment reiterates that genuine taxpayers may receive an additional opportunity to substantiate their claims where sufficient cause for non-participation is shown.
Sections Involved
- Section
73 – Determination of tax not paid or short paid or
erroneously refunded or Input Tax Credit wrongly availed or utilised.
- Section
161 – Rectification of errors apparent on the face of the
record.
- Article 226 of the Constitution of India – Writ Jurisdiction of the High Court.
Link to Download the Order https://mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1784874700_1949compressed.pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment