As a consequence of the impugned assessment order being set aside, the court raised the bank attachment

The Madras High Court set aside the GST (Goods and Services Tax) assessment order on a 10% pre-deposit condition where the tax liability was confirmed on GSTR 3B and GSTR 2A Mismatch due to non-response  to the SCN (Show Cause Notice).

The petitioner, Quantum Associates asserted that he was unaware of proceedings culminating in the impugned assessment order because the show cause notice and impugned order were uploaded on the “View Additional Notices and Orders” tab on the GST portal, but not communicated to the petitioner through any other mode.

The petitioner also submitted that the tax proposal pertained to the mismatch between the petitioner’s GSTR 3B returns and the auto populated GSTR 2A. If an opportunity is provided, the counsel submitted that the petitioner would be in a position to establish that only eligible Input Tax Credit was availed. On instructions, counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner agreed to remit 10% of the disputed tax demand as a condition for remand. Mr.V.Prashanth Kiran, Government Advocate, accepted notice for respondents 1 (The Deputy State Tax Officer) and 2  [Deputy Commissioner (ST) Chennai Central]. He pointed out that the recovery notice was served on the petitioner on 27.12.2023 after issuing the impugned assessment order. Further contended that the petitioner was aware of proceedings at least on 27.12.2023. He also pointed out that the impugned order was preceded by a show cause notice and sufficient opportunity was provided to the petitioner. The bench of Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, after examining the order stated that it is evident that the tax proposal pertained to the mismatch between the petitioner’s GSTR 3B returns and the auto-populated GSTR 2A. It is also clear that the tax proposal was confirmed because the petitioner failed to reply to the show cause notice. Thus, decided to provide an opportunity to the petitioner to contest the tax demand on merits and on terms. Consequently, the High Court set aside the impugned GST assessment order, with the condition that the petitioner remit 10% of the disputed tax demand within two weeks and file a reply to the show cause notice within the same period. Upon receipt of the petitioner’s reply and confirmation of the 10% remittance, the respondent was directed to afford the petitioner a reasonable opportunity, including a personal hearing, and issue a fresh order within three months. As a consequence of the impugned assessment order being set aside, the court raised the bank attachment. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly. M/s. M.Narasimha Bharathi appeared for the petitioner.