High Court of Madras
Southern Steels v. Assistant Commissioner (ST)
W.P.NOS. 21110, 21113, 21115, 21122, 21126, 20374, 20390, 20394, 20406 & 20410 OF 2024
The ruling in brief
Where assessee operated two registrations and department inspection revealed circular transactions and fictitious ITC on non-supplies, such findings prima facie justified invoking extended limitation period under GST for both registrations and challenge to such invocation was untenable as all procedural requirements for Erode registration were duly followed as threshold for invoking extended period under GST regime is lower than previous indirect tax laws
Where post-remand DRC-07 orders for Gobichettipalayam were passed without prior DRC-01 show cause notice, such orders were to be set aside for fresh adjudication with opportunity and natural justice, while Erode proceedings that followed proper sequence with DRC-01A and DRC-01 reply suffered no procedural infirmity and were not to be interfered
Provisions considered
Section 74, read with section 75, of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017; Section 74, read with section 75, of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017/Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Rule 142 of Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017/Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017
This summary is for general information and is not legal advice. Read the full decision and the applicable law before relying on it.