THE High Court of Kerala stated that any assessment order issued before the deadline for filing a response has no legal validity and may be set aside.

The bench of Justice Gopinath P. observed that “…….the assessee had filed an appeal against the order, this is not a ground for denying relief to the assessee, as the original order was clearly passed in violation of the principles of natural justice……. “

In this case, a show cause notice dated June 20, 2023 granted the assessee time till July 21, 2023 to file a reply. However, an assessment order was issued on July 11, 2023, before the expiry of the time limit for the assessee to respond.

The assessee has filed a petition challenging the assessment order issued under the provisions of Section 73 of the CGST/SGST Acts.

The department contended that the assessee has already appealed against the order, claiming the benefit of notice (issued in the matter of limitation for filing appeal), which in its terms was clearly not applicable to the assessee . . It was submitted that the appeal filed by the assessee was also dismissed by another order finding that it was barred by limitation.

The bench noted that even though the assessee could have filed an appeal against the assessment order (which was dismissed by another order on the ground of limitation), the fact remains that another order was rendered in violation of the principles of natural justice.

Furthermore, the court stated that “……..it is clear from the show cause notice that the assessee was given time till 21.07.2023 to respond to the show cause notice. The order appears to have been issued on 07/11/2023, even before the response deadline had expired. The order is therefore liable to be set aside………..”

The fact that the assessee has filed an appeal against the assessment order is not a ground for denying relief to the assessee as the order was clearly passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, the bench added .

In view of the above, the bench allowed the petition and set aside the assessment order.

Counsel for the petitioner/assessee: Padmanathan KV and R. Sreejith

Counsel for the respondent/department: Dayasindhu Shreehari NS and Jasmin MM

Case title: Elsy Joy v. Deputy State Tax Commissioner

Case number: WP(C) NO. 35393 FROM 2024

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 682

Click here to read/download the order