IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 29.03.2022

CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR

Writ Petition No.7254 of 2022

and

W.M.P.Nos.7284 & 7285 of 2022

M/s.Quality Mart,

Rep. By its Proprietrix, Mrs.Reena Saravanan

….

Petitioner

-Vs-

1.

The Assistant Commissioner (ST),

Hosur (North-2) Circle,

Hosur.

2.

The Manager,

ICICI Bank Limited,

GSN Arcade,

Vemala Kalyana Mandapam,

Hosur-635 109.

….

Respondents

Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling

for the connected records of the impugned proceedings of the 1^st

respondent herein made in GSTN 33FSKPS7710G1ZH/2017-18, TIN

33966287637/2017-18 dated 08.07.2021 and consequential recovery

notice/attachment order dated 15.11.2021 passed in his

proceedings in Roc.84/2021/A3 by the 1^st respondent against the

2^nd respondent herein and quash the same.

For Petitioner

: Mr.Manoharan Sundaram

For Respondents

: Mr.Mr.V.Prasanth Kiran,

Government Advocate

O R D E R

The prayer sought for herein is for a Writ of Certiorari

calling for the connected records of the impugned proceedings of

the 1^st respondent herein made in GSTN 33FSKPS7710G1ZH/2017-18,

TIN 33966287637/2017-18 dated 08.07.2021 and consequential

recovery notice/attachment order dated 15.11.2021 passed in his

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

proceedings in Roc.84/2021/A3 by the 1^st respondent against the

2^nd respondent herein and quash the same.

2. Under the GST Regime, the petitioner claim for Input Tax

Credit was reversed through the order of the assessment dated

08.07.2021 for the assessment year 2017-18. Challenging the

same, the present Writ Petition has been filed by the

petitioner.

3. One of the ground raised by the petitioner dealer is that

under Section 73 (10) of the TNGST Act, 2017 (In short 'the

Act') that the assessing officer should have passed an order

within three years period from the due date for furnishing of

annual return for the financial year to which the tax was not

paid or short paid or input tax credit wrongly availed etc.,

4. Within these three years period, since the same has not

been passed, on the ground of limitation itself, the impugned

order is infirm and therefore on the main ground though the

petitioner had made challenge against the impugned order, the

learned counsel for the petitioner also has canvased the point

that the assessing officer has stated that the documents have

not been filed in support of the claim made by the petitioner

for claiming Input Tax Credit and in this regard, all original

documents are with the petitioner, which they are ready and

willing to submit before the assessing authority any time.

Therefore, on these grounds the petitioner wants to assail the

impugned order.

5. However, Mr.V.Prasanth Kiran, learned Government Advocate

appearing for the respondents would submit that the due date for

furnishing the annual return for the financial year 2017-18 was

30.09.2018 and if that date is taken into consideration, within

three years period i.e., on 08.07.2021 itself the order impugned

has been passed, therefore it is saved by limitation.

6. Insofar as other merits of the case which has also been

canvased by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned

Government Advocate appearing for the respondents would further

submit that, those issues can be decided by the appellate

authority before whom, appeal can be very well be filed of

course within three months from the date of the order impugned

plus one month further condonable period and that chance also

had been missed by the petitioner/dealer. Therefore the

challenge now made is not entertainable. Hence, he seeks

dismissal of the Writ Petition.

7. I have considered the submissions made by the learned

counsel appearing on either side and have perused the materials

placed on reco