• twitter-icon
Unlimited Tax Return Filing


Madras HC: Registered Persons Must Monitor the GST Portal, Can’t Be Absolved of Responsibility

Madras HC's Order In Case of M/s.Bajrang & Bajrang Vs. State Tax Officer (FAC)

The Madras High Court ruled that the taxpayer could not be absolved of responsibility as a registered person to track the GST portal.

The bench of Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy has marked that an audit was accomplished and that a GST audit report on 15.09.2023 was provided. An intimation and show cause notice preceded the impugned order. As the petitioner did not furnish a response along with supporting documents it is evident that the tax proposal was confirmed. Hence, by putting the applicant on terms, the interest of justice mandates that the applicant be provided a chance.

Read Also: GST: Madras HC Directs Respondents to Issue a New SCN, No Hearing Opportunity Was Given

The applicant is nearly 78 years old and was suffering from distinct illnesses. It mentioned that he was not able to answer the SCN or participate in the proceedings.

The applicant argued that the applicant shall answer to each of the 5 defects dealt with in the impugned order when furnished a chance. The applicant wishes to remit 10% of the disputed tax demand as a condition for remand.

The intimation and show cause notice (SCN) was after the issuance of the audit report to the petitioner, the council argued. Enough chance was afforded before the applicant.

The order was set aside by the court and the case is remanded for reconsideration as per the condition that the applicant remits 10% of the disputed tax demand which was agreed to in the highest duration of 3 weeks.

As per the court, the applicant is authorized to respond to the SCN. On the applicant’s response receipt and on being satisfied that 10% of the disputed tax demand was obtained, the respondent is asked to furnish a reasonable chance to the applicant, as well as a personal hearing, and administer a fresh order within 2 months from the date of receipt of the response of the applicant.

Case TitleM/s.Bajrang & Bajrang Vs. State Tax Officer (FAC)
CitationW.P.No.9960 of 2024 and W.M.P.Nos.10982 & 10983 of 2024
Date16-04-2024
For PetitionerMr.A.Ilaya Perumal
For RespondentMr.V.Prashanth Kiran
Madras High CourtRead Order

Disclaimer:- "All the information given is from credible and authentic resources and has been published after moderation. Any change in detail or information other than fact must be considered a human error. The blog we write is to provide updated information. You can raise any query on matters related to blog content. Also, note that we don’t provide any type of consultancy so we are sorry for being unable to reply to consultancy queries. Also, we do mention that our replies are solely on a practical basis and we advise you to cross verify with professional authorities for a fact check."

Published by Arpit Kulshrestha
Arpit Kulshrestha seeks higher interests in financial services, taxation, GST, I-T, etc. Writes articles with depth knowledge and is extensive for the same. The resources provide effective articles for the products of SAG infotech which provides taxation and IT software. Writing from observations and researching makes his articles virtuous. View more posts
SAGINFOTECH PRODUCTS

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Follow Us on Google News

Google News

Latest Posts

New Offer for Professionals

Super Tax Offer

Upto 20% Off
Tax, ROC/MCA, XBRL, Payroll, Online GST

Limited Offer, Hurry

Big Offer for Tax Experts

Upto 20% Discount on Tax Software

    Select Product*

    Current GST Due Dates