GST Order passed for GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A mismatch set aside for lack of opportunity of heard [Read Order]

The Madras High Court in the matter of M/s.Samadhu Medicals Vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer passed GST Order for GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A mismatch set aside for lack of opportunity of heard.

The Official Judgment Stated:

This Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of writ of certiorari to call for the impugned proceedings of the respondent dated 12.04.2023 for the assessment year 2019-2020, the consequential order dated 12.04.2023 passed under Section 73 of the TNGST/CGST Act, 2017 issued in Reference No.ZD330423055736E and the summary of the order dated 12.04.2023 issued in Form GST DRC-07 in Reference No.ZD330423055736E and quash the impugned orders as the same are passed contrary to the provisions of the CGST Act, 2017 and TNGST Act, 2017.

Mr.P.Rajkumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the present impugned proceedings had been initiated due to the input mismatch between GSTR 3B return and GSTR 2A statement. The learned counsel contended that all communications pertaining to the impugned proceedings were intimated to the mobile number of one of the petitioner’s staff Mr.T.Paneerselvam who expired on 30.04.2019. In so for as the communications sent via email is concerned, the same were sent to the mail ID provided by the petitioner, which belongs to one Mr.Sivakumar, viz., consultant of the petitioner, who has also expired on 05.02.2022 and hence, the petitioner was not aware of the initiation of impugned proceedings against him and only when the petitioner’s bank account came to be attached, the petitioner came to know about the impugned proceedings, and immediately, the petitioner approached this Court seeking for quashing the impugned orders.

On the other hand, Mrs.K.Vasanthamala, learned Government Advocate (Tax) for the respondent would contend that before passing the impugned order on 12.04.2023, the communication with regard to initiation of the impugned proceedings were sent only to the number/mail address provided by the petitioner and subsequent to the death of the persons being engaged by the petitioner for filing their returns, the petitioner ought to have taken steps by engaging any other accountant and hence, the petitioner cannot plead ignorance of the impugned orders. However, the learned Government Advocate submitted that since the petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned orders, the only remedy available to the petitioner is go on appeal before the Appellate Authority.

At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied if the Court grants liberty to the petitioner to agitate the issues before the Appellate Authority, by way of an appeal.

Given due consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Advocate (Tax) appearing for the respondent.

The main grievance of the petitioner is that the person/consultant, viz., Mr. Paneerselvam and Mr.Sivakumar, who were engaged by the petitioner for filing the returns passed away on 30.04.2019 and 05.02.2022 respectively and hence the petitioner was not in a position to know about the impugned proceedings initiated against them and the consequential orders and hence, the petitioner was not able to file appropriate application and appear before the authorities concerned and put forth their case by way of reply. However, since the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied, if this Court grants liberty to the petitioner to agitate their case before the Appellate Authority by way of appeal, this Writ Petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the Appellate Authority by way of filing an appeal within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, in which case, the authorities concerned shall entertain the same without insisting upon limitation aspect, if any and dispose of the same, in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity to the petitioner. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

For Official Judgment Download the PDF Given Below: