Madras HC Affirms Interest Levy for Valid Returns Submitted Within 30 Days

• Two writ petitions are being disposed of in this common order.

• The petitioner has challenged two orders passed by the State Tax Officer (Intelligence) on 15-10-2019 for the Assessment Years 2017-18 and 2018-19 under the TNGST Act, 2017 in Form GST ASMT-13.

• The petitioner, a manufacturer of desiccated coconut, was registered under various acts and later under GST.

• The petitioner failed to pay tax due to business setbacks, customer payment defaults, and stopped filing returns after November 2017.

• The petitioner claimed to have closed the business due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

• An inspection was carried out, and the petitioner admitted to tax liability from July 2017 to March 2019.

• The petitioner received a notice on 17-6-2019 for failing to file GSTR-3B returns.

• On 1-7-2019, another notice was issued, calling for GSTR-3B returns, and warning of action under Section 62 of the Act.

• A further notice on 23-7-2019 demanded payment for the period between April 2018 and March 2019.

• The petitioner did not comply with the requirements, requesting more time but failing to pay tax or file returns.

• During arguments, the petitioner claimed they couldn't upload Form-GSTR-3B due to being unable to avail input tax credit on purchases.

• The government pleader argued that the writ petitions lack merit.

• The impugned orders were issued on 15-10-2019, and the time limit for filing an appeal had already expired when the writ petitions were filed on 17-9-2020.

• Citing the Supreme Court, it was noted that high courts cannot entertain writ petitions against assessment orders beyond the statutory period.

• These writ petitions were filed beyond the statutory period of limitation and are liable to be dismissed.

• The petitioner filed GSTR-1 returns but failed to file GSTR-3B returns, admitting to tax liability.

• The petitioner partially paid the tax liability for July 2017 and August 2018.

• Another notice on 1-7-2019 required the petitioner to file returns for September 2017 to March 2018.

• A subsequent notice for personal hearing on 23-7-2019 demanded payment for the period from April 2018 to March 2019, with no satisfactory response from the petitioner.

• The petitioner was required to file Annual and Final Returns.

• The Assessing Officer passed the impugned orders on 15-10-2019 based on materials gathered during an inspection and assessed the petitioner's tax liability.

• The tax liability determined is the net amount after adjustment of Input Tax Credit (ITC) in GSTR-2A.

• The petitioner did not furnish a valid return within thirty days, and, therefore, there's no case for interfering with the Impugned Assessment Orders.

• The writ petitions are liable to be dismissed, but the petitioner is given liberty to seek time for discharging the tax liability in installments.

• These writ petitions stand dismissed, and there are no costs. M.K.N. Coconut Industries vs. State Tax Officer (Intelligence)