• twitter-icon
Unlimited Tax Return Filing


Madras HC Orders Re-assessment of GST Order Issued Without Considering GSTR-9 Annual Return

Madras HC's Order In the Case of Tvl Sri Sakthi Steel v/s State Tax Officer (STO)

The Madras High Court has asked the State Tax Officer (STO) to re-adjudicate a demand order issued to the applicant for not regarding the Goods and Services Tax GST annual return in Form GSTR-9 filed dated 30.09.2020 for the assessment period 2018-19.

Tvl Sri Sakthi Steel filed the writ petition contesting a GST demand order issued against them dated February 28, 2023. The applicant claimed that the order, which originated from proceedings started by a SCN on December 13, 2022, failed to regard their annual return filed for the 2018-19 assessment period.

As per the petition, the applicant was not knowledgeable about such proceedings. The department uploaded the Show Cause Notice and the impugned order on the GST portal, without any additional communication.

Read Also: Best Strategies to Handle GST SCN with Basic Reply Format

The applicant’s counsel N.Chandirasekar, referred to the yearly return in Form GSTR 9 and claimed that such a return was filed dated 30.09.2020 concerning the assessment duration 2018-19. He pointed out that despite filing this return, the impugned order stated that the annual return had not been filed.

K. Vasanthamala, representing the respondents, considered that the impugned order was preceded via an intimation, after the show cause notice and a personal hearing notice.

The applicant put on record the annual return in Form GSTR 9, remarked by Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy. A late fee has been levied by the impugned order on the applicant for failing to file the yearly return for the assessment period 2018-19.

It was revealed by the single bench that the order was being issued without regarding the yearly return filed via the applicant. The same needs a reconsideration of the matter.

The impugned order has been set aside by the Madras High Court, and the case was remanded for reconsideration. The respondent was asked to furnish the applicant a reasonable chance to be heard, along with the personal hearing, and hence issue a fresh order within 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

Case TitleTvl.Sri Sakthi Steel V/S Deputy State Tax Officer
Case No.: W.P.No.15179 of 2024
Date19.06.2024
Counsel For AppellantMr. N.Chandirasekar
Counsel For RespondentMrs.K.Vasanthamala Govt. Advocate for R1
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