In a recent ruling, the Madras High Court has directed the Goods and Services Tax ( GST ) department to pass a fresh order after hearing on the issue of TCS ( Tax Collected Source ) mismatch between GSTR 8 and GSTR 1. The assessment detected issues including output mismatch between GSTR-3B and GSTR-1, TCS mismatch between GSTR-8 and GSTR-1, and ITC variation between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A.

Master GST – Expert-Led Courses for Ambitious Professionals Although the petitioner received an intimation in Form DRC-01 on January 31, 2024, and was offered a hearing on July 18, 2023, followed by a reminder on March 21, 2024, they neither responded nor attended the hearings. The petitioner contended that the notices and orders were only uploaded on the GST portal and not served physically or via registered post, leaving them unaware of the proceedings.

The petitioner’s counsel argued that they should be given an opportunity to explain the discrepancies, relying on the precedent set in M/s. K. Balakrishnan, Balu Cables v. Assistant Commissioner of GST & Central Excise, where a similar case was remanded after a 25% deposit of disputed tax. Justice Mohammed Shaffiq, acknowledging the petitioner’s readiness to pay 25% of the disputed tax, set aside the impugned order. It directed the petitioner to deposit the amount within four weeks. Master GST – Expert-Led Courses for Ambitious Professionals

The assessment order was directed to be treated as a show cause notice, and the petitioner was instructed to submit objections along with supporting documents within the same period. The adjudicating authority was ordered to consider these objections and pass a fresh decision after granting the petitioner a fair hearing. The court clarified that failure to comply with the conditions would result in the restoration of the original assessment order. The writ petition was disposed of without costs.