The Madras High Court in a judgment has noted that the amount recovered from the Goods and Services Tax ( GST ) authorities can be adjusted for 25% pre-deposit. The impugned order has been set aside by the bench for the AY 2018-19.
A proprietor who represents the applicant who is a GST-registered entity has contested the order mentioning the discrepancies between the taxable supplies notified in GSTR 3B returns and Form 26AS and GSTR 2B.
It was claimed by the applicant that the alleged mismatch was directed to a tax demand notice furnished in DRC-01 dated 07.08.2023. Even after providing a response dated 3.4.2024 the adjudicating authority has rejected it mentioning the inadequate documentation.
The applicant asked for a chance to specify the discrepancies lying on an identical matter in which the court remanded the case within a 25% pre-deposit of disputed taxes.
The applicant in the proceedings has furnished that Rs 11, 47, 827 has been recovered from the total demand of Rs 30,27,780 surpassing the 25% limit.
From the counsel of the respondent, the court does not observe any objection and asks the same recovered amount to be adjusted for the pre-deposit pre-requisite.
The impugned order has been set aside by Justice Mohammed Shaffiq citing that the applicant is required to deposit a balance of 25% disputed taxes if any within the cited durations. It also asked the GST department to validate the payments, intimate any left amounts, and lift bank attachments or garnishee proceedings upon compliance.
| Case Title | Subramani Babu, Proprietor vs. The Assistant Commissioner (ST) |
| Citation | W.P. No.36784 of 2024 W.M.P. Nos.39700, 39702 and 39703 of 2024 |
| Date | 21.12.2024 |
| Counsel For Appellant | Mr.V.Haribabu |
| Counsel For Respondent | Ms.Amrita Dinakaran Government Advocate (for R1 & R2) Mr.C.Mohan for M/s.King & Partridge (for R4) |
| Madras High Court | Read Order |
