W.P. No.1774 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 27.01.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ W.P. No.1774 of 2025 & WMP.Nos.2023 & 2024 of 2025 M/s.Sri Sai Agencies Rep.by its Partner Mr.U.Ganesh Kumar 190/1, NA, Thalayatham Bazar, Gudiyattam – 632 602. ... Petitioner Vs. Commercial Tax Officer, Gudiyattam (West) Assessment Circle, Integrated Commercial Taxes Building, R.S.Road, Parasuramanpatti, Gudiyatham – 635 803. ... Respondent PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking for a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the impugned Rectification order dated 23.10.2024 bearing Reference No.ZD3310241750221 together with impugned order dated 30.04.2024 bearing Reference No.ZD330424254673F and its Form GST DRC – 07 dated 30.04.2024 of the Respondent passed for the GSTIN:33ABPFS7379J1ZD/2018-19 and quash the same as arbitrary, illegal and without jurisdiction. For Petitioner ... Mr.R.Anish Kumar For Respondents ... Mr.C.Harsha Raj Additional Government Pleader 1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No.1774 of 2025 ORDER The present writ petition is filed challenging the impugned order dated 30.04.2024 and also the order dated 23.10.2024 passed on the rectification petition under Section 161 of the GST Act. 2.The learned counsel for the petitioner would however confine the challenge to order dated 30.04.2024 on the premise that the order has been passed without assigning any reason while rejecting the petitioner's objection. The petitioner is a dealer registered under GST Act. On examination of the information furnished in the returns under various heads and also the information furnished in GSTR-01, GSTR-2A, GSTR-3B, EWB and other records, the following discrepancies were noticed viz., Under declaration of output tax and Excess claim of input tax credit. 3.The petitioner submitted its objection vide letter dated 05.01.2024, which is extracted hereunder: “1.Table 6 Discrepancy According to the GSTR 9 guidelines, Table 6 is expected to be auto-populated with the amounts provided during the monthly return filing in GSTR 3B. 2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No.1774 of 2025 However, it has come to our attention that Table 6 has not been auto-populated with the amounts fed during the GSTR 3B filing. This has led to the erroneous representation of excess utilization of input Tax Credit (ITC), which is not reflective of the actual utilization. We kindly request your esteemed office to verify the accuracy of our claim by cross-referencing the details in GSTR 2A and the corresponding GSTR 3B filings for the respective months. 2.Table 9 Discrepancy: -In relation to sales reported in GSTR 1, the date is auto- populated in Table 4, and the corresponding tax payments are made in GSTR 3B for each month. -Regrettably, Table 9 in GSTR 9, which should auto- populate as “paid” for the reported sales in GSTR 1, is not reflecting the accurate status. This discrepancy creates an inaccurate portrayal of the payment status for the reported sales. -We urge your office to verify this discrepancy by cross- referencing the details in the attached GSTR 3B filings for all the relevant months. 3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No.1774 of 2025 To facilitate a thorough examination, we have attached the GSTR 3B filings for all months as referenced in our submission. Table 6 Summary Particulars CGST ITC SGST ITC IGST ITC As per GSTR 3B 3794524 3794524 0 As per GSTR 2A auto populated 3794524 3794524 0 As per GSTR 9 Table 6 Which has to be corrected (Error while filing) 3794524 3794524 0 No difference between 3B availed ITC and Actual ITC. Only due to error in GSTR 9 system generated Data which has lead to confusion. Table 9 summary Particulars CGST ITC SGST ITC IGST ITC As per GSTR 3B 4070315 4070315 0 As per GSTR 9 which should be auto-populated but error occurred 4070315 4070315 0 Difference Nil Nil Nil We appreciate your prompt attention to this matter and kindly request clarification on the steps to rectify these discrepancies at your earliest convenience. Should you require any additional information or clarification, 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No.1774 of 2025 please do not hesitate to contact us. 4.However, the impugned order came to be passed by merely stating that the reply filed by the taxpayer is not acceptable. The relevant portion of the impugned order is extracted hereunder; “ . . . . Having received all the communications electronically in GST Common portal, the taxable person has filed their reply. The reply filed by the taxable person has been examined and is not acceptable.:” 5.It is submitted that the impugned order does not assign any reason and thus suffer from the vice of being a non speaking order. 6.The learned counsel for the respondent would submit that they would redo the assessment after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No.1774 of 2025 7.In view thereof, the impugned orders are set aside. The respondent shall pass a speaking order after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, taking into account the reply and any document that may be filed by the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Speaking (or) Non Speaking Order Index : Yes/ No 27.01.2025 Neutral Citation: Yes/No sms To Commercial Tax Officer, Gudiyattam (West) Assessment Circle, Integrated Commercial Taxes Building, R.S.Road, Parasuramanpatti, Gudiyatham – 635 803. 6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No.1774 of 2025 MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J. sms W.P. No.1774 of 2025 & WMP.Nos.2023 & 2024 of 2025 27.01.2025 7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P. No.1774 of 2025 8/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis