Case Title: Tvl. Metal Smith India Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner (ST), Gandhipuram Assessment Circle, Coimbatore
Court: Madras High Court
Petition Nos.: W.P. Nos. 10262 and 10268 of 2025
Date of Judgement: 24.03.2025
Category of Dispute: Assessment Order – Violation of Natural Justice
Relevant Sections: Section 73 and Section 161 of the CGST/TNGST Act, 2017\
Facts of the Case (Paras 2–8)
The petitioner, Tvl. Metal Smith India Pvt. Ltd., challenged the assessment order dated 26.04.2024 and the subsequent rectification order dated 15.02.2025 passed by the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Gandhipuram, Coimbatore, under Section 73 of the CGST/TNGST Act, 2017.
Initially, a notice in Form ASMT-10 was issued on 04.01.2022, for which the petitioner filed a reply on 07.04.2022. Surprisingly, another ASMT-10 notice was issued for the same period on 09.10.2023, followed by a pre-show cause notice dated 11.12.2023 and a show cause notice dated 16.12.2023.
The petitioner sought time and a personal hearing through replies dated 16.01.2024 and 28.02.2024. However, the assessing authority passed the impugned assessment order without granting an opportunity of personal hearing. The petitioner’s subsequent rectification application under Section 161 was rejected, stating that the proper remedy was by way of an appeal, which the petitioner’s consultant had failed to file in time.
Questions for Consideration (Paras 5–7)
Whether the assessment order and the rectification order passed under Sections 73 and 161 of the CGST/TNGST Act, 2017 were valid, despite being issued without providing a personal hearing and ignoring the petitioner’s requests for adjournment and submissions?
Court’s Observations (Paras 9–12)
The Court observed that the department issued multiple notices for the same assessment year and that the petitioner’s requests for time and personal hearing were not considered.
It reiterated that failure to provide a personal hearing before confirming a tax demand constitutes a violation of the principles of natural justice. Citing the settled position that violation of natural justice equates to failure of due process, the Court held that the assessment order was passed in breach of statutory fairness and contrary to law.
Judgement / Verdict (Para 12–13)
The High Court set aside both the impugned assessment order (26.04.2024) and the rectification order (15.02.2025), and remitted the matter to the assessing authority for fresh adjudication.
The remand was subject to the condition that the petitioner shall pay ₹5,00,000 within four weeks. The petitioner was directed to file a detailed reply with documents within two weeks thereafter, and the authority was instructed to issue a 14-day clear notice for personal hearing before passing a fresh order.
Additionally, any bank account attachment made pursuant to the earlier order was directed to be lifted upon proof of payment of ₹5,00,000.
Between Fine Lines – Trade Impact
This ruling reaffirms that assessment orders without personal hearings lack legal validity under GST law. Businesses must ensure proper documentation and representation during adjudication. Similarly, assessing officers must adhere strictly to Section 75(4) of the CGST Act, which mandates an opportunity of hearing before confirming any demand. The case underscores that even in instances of procedural lapse (like missing appeal timelines), Courts may intervene to restore fairness, provided taxpayers demonstrate bona fides.
Summary of Cases Referred
| Case | Court | Principle Laid Down |
|---|---|---|
| No separate case cited | – | The present case reiterates the general principle that orders violating natural justice are void. |
Disclaimer – “The above summary is for academic purpose only; not formal legal opinion. Seek professional opinion before application. Author or publisher or website shall not be responsible for any usage in any form.”
