Mismatch between Turnover Reported in GSTR 9 and GSTR 3B: Madras HC sets aside Demand Order for Lack of Hearing\r\n

The Madras High Court annulled a GST demand order issued due to discrepancies between monthly (GSTR-3B) and annual (GSTR-9) return filings, citing the petitioner's lack of a fair hearing. \r

The Assistant Commissioner had demanded tax on 01.11.2023, based on these discrepancies. Petitioner's counsel, N. Murali, argued that the petitioner could explain the mismatch if given the opportunity and agreed to remit 10% of the disputed tax as a condition for reconsideration. Despite respondent C. Harsha Raj's claim of due process, Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy noted that the tax proposal was confirmed solely due to the petitioner's non-response and absence at hearings. \r

Given the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration and claimed unawareness of proceedings, the court mandated a reconsideration. The petitioner must remit 10% of the disputed tax and reply to the show cause notice within fifteen days. The Assistant Commissioner is then to provide a hearing and issue a new order within three months.