Facts of the Case

The petitioner, M/s. Golden Mesh Industries, a proprietorship of Mr. Pradeep Kumar Gupta at Elikatta Village, Mahbubnagar District, Telangana, challenged Assessment Orders dated 27.12.2019 for the tax periods December 2018 to October 2019, alleging violation of natural justice and contravention of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the Telangana GST Act, 2017. The petitioner also challenged the consequent Attachment Notice of its bank account dated 19.3.2020 (effective 7.12.2020), and a Distraint Order dated 9.3.2021 together with a Demand Notice Prior to Attachment dated 20.3.2021, both issued under the Telangana Revenue Recovery Act II of 1864 in respect of immovable property at Survey No.565/568, Elikatta Village. The petitioner sought stay of collection of disputed tax, interest, late fee and penalty totalling Rs.1,04,44,500 levied under the best-judgment assessment.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the best-judgment assessment orders dated 27.12.2019 were passed in violation of principles of natural justice.
  2. Whether the consequent bank attachment, distraint order and demand notice survive if the underlying assessment order is set aside.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The assessment order itself was received only on 7.1.2020, and the show cause notice was issued the same day but served on the petitioner only on a subsequent date — meaning the assessment was completed before the petitioner got any opportunity to respond.
  • Relied on a Division Bench order of the same Court in the petitioner's own connected matter (W.P. No.7789 of 2021, decided 31.3.2021), which had set aside a similarly structured best-judgment assessment for want of a Section 62 notice and personal hearing, and quashed the consequential attachment/garnishee orders.
  • Sought setting aside of the assessment order and the consequential attachment, distraint order and demand notice on identical grounds.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The order does not record any substantive contest by the respondents on the natural-justice point; the State's counsel was heard, but the Court proceeded on the strength of the petitioner's unrebutted factual narrative and the binding effect of the Division Bench's earlier order in the petitioner's own related matter.

Court Order/Findings

  • Relying on its earlier Division Bench decision in the petitioner's own connected case, the Court held that a best-judgment assessment passed without prior notice of the method of assessment under Section 62 and without a personal hearing is prima facie arbitrary and contrary to the Telangana GST Act, 2017.
  • Set aside the impugned Assessment Order dated 27.12.2019 and remitted the matter to the Assessing Officer for a fresh order.
  • As the interference was solely on natural-justice grounds, directed that the assessment order itself be treated as a show cause notice, with the petitioner to file a reply by 6.11.2023 and the officer to decide within 45 days of receiving the reply.
  • Since the assessment order was set aside, the consequential attachment and garnishee orders issued by respondents 1 to 3 were also set aside.

Important Clarification

  • A best-judgment assessment under Section 62 requires the assessee to be notified of the method of assessment and granted a personal hearing before the order is passed — a show cause notice served after the assessment order is a nullity for natural-justice purposes.
  • Setting aside a best-judgment assessment for want of natural justice automatically knocks out downstream recovery steps — bank attachment, garnishee notices and distraint orders — since they derive their validity from the assessment.
  • Courts may convert the quashed assessment order itself into a fresh show cause notice to save time, rather than restarting the process from scratch.

Sections Involved

  • Section 62 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 / Telangana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – provides for best-judgment assessment where a registered person fails to furnish returns.
  • Telangana Revenue Recovery Act, 1864 – the machinery invoked for distraint and demand notices to recover assessed dues.

Decision – In Favour of

The order is in favour of the Assessee. The assessment order and consequential attachment/distraint were set aside, and the matter remitted for fresh assessment after a hearing.

Related Case Laws

No directly on-point case notes are currently published on this site.

Case Details

  • Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad
  • Case No.: Writ Petition No. 7826 of 2021
  • CNR: Not available on record
  • Coram: Justice P. Sam Koshy and Justice Laxmi Narayana Alishetty
  • Decision Date: 05.10.2023
  • Disposal Nature: Allowed

Link to Download the Order

Download the full judgment (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.