P. Athimoolam Contractor V. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes

Mrs. E. Ranganayaki, a knowledgeable Special Government Pleader, has taken notice on behalf of the respondents in a legal matter. Initially, it’s observed that the petitioner has apparently suffered from severe injustice. This injustice stems from the delay in paying taxes owed for the months of September and October 2019, which were eventually settled by the petitioner on 11th November 2020. The payments were made concurrently with the filing of returns in March, as per Form GSTR-3B under Rule 61(5) of the GST Act. Moreover, an additional amount of Rs. 4,13,222/- has been recovered in connection with this matter, pursuant to an order issued on 6th December 2022.

This order, referred to as GST ASMT-10, appears to be significant in the context of resolving the issues related to the delayed tax payments. It is this order that has led to the recovery of the mentioned sum. However, the circumstances surrounding the issuance of this order, including its validity and procedural correctness, may warrant further scrutiny.

The situation presents a complex legal scenario where the petitioner has been compelled to address tax liabilities retrospectively, facing financial repercussions as a result. The belated payments and subsequent recovery raise questions about the fairness and efficacy of the tax administration process.

In essence, Mrs. E. Ranganayaki’s involvement signifies the official response to the petitioner’s claims and the legal actions taken by the respondents. The case underscores the importance of examining the procedural aspects, fairness, and potential consequences of tax-related decisions, ensuring equitable treatment for all parties involved.