Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, a registered dealer under GST, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Judicature at Madras challenging an assessment order dated 18.06.2025 passed by the Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC) for the tax period 2022-23. The sole ground of challenge was that the order was passed in violation of principles of natural justice. During the course of proceedings, the petitioner’s counsel submitted that while filing the appeal against the assessment order, a pre-deposit of 10% of the tax demand had been made, and moreover, the entire tax demand had been recovered by the department from the petitioner’s electronic liability ledger. The respondent tax authorities did not dispute the factual position but sought verification. The Court, after taking note of these submissions, concluded that if it is verified and confirmed that not less than 25% of the tax demand under the impugned order had been remitted or recovered, the assessment order deserved to be set aside for breach of natural justice. Accordingly, the Court set aside the order dated 18.06.2025, remanded the matter to the assessing officer for reconsideration, and directed that a fresh order be passed within three months from the date of confirming the recovery, after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.
Headnote
A) Taxation - Goods and Services Tax - Breach of Natural Justice - Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 - The impugned assessment order dated 18.06.2025 was challenged on the ground that it was passed in breach of principles of natural justice. The court noted that the petitioner had made a pre-deposit of 10% and the entire tax demand was recovered from the electronic liability ledger. Subject to verification that not less than 25% of the tax demand was remitted or recovered, the order was set aside and the matter remanded for reconsideration with a direction to pass a fresh order within three months after providing reasonable opportunity to the petitioner. Held, the writ petition is disposed of by setting aside the impugned order and remanding the matter. (Paras 1-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the impugned assessment order dated 18.06.2025 is liable to be set aside for breach of principles of natural justice, and whether the petitioner is entitled to a fresh hearing.
Final Decision
The impugned order dated 18.06.2025 was set aside, subject to verification that not less than 25% of the tax demand was remitted or recovered, and the matter was remanded to the assessing authority for a fresh order after providing reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, to be passed within three months from confirming the recovery. No costs.
Law Points
- principles of natural justice
- pre-deposit requirement
- writ jurisdiction under Article 226
