Vasavi Wedding vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Vasavi Wedding vs State of Andhra Pradesh — What Small Businesses Need to Know A real-world GST dispute shows how social media posts, personal hardshi

Vasavi Wedding vs State of Andhra Pradesh — What Small Businesses Need to Know

A real-world GST dispute shows how social media posts, personal hardship and compliance gaps can result in a large tax demand. Below is a clear, practical breakdown of the Andhra Pradesh High Court decision in the case involving M/s. Sri Vasavi Wedding & Event Planners and lessons for every small business owner.

Background
The petitioner was a registered GST taxpayer (effective registration: 1 July 2017) operating an event-management firm. Due to serious health issues of the proprietor’s husband and the COVID-19 pandemic, business activity was severely curtailed, and GST registration was cancelled from 1 August 2020.

What triggered the assessment?
Tax authorities inspected the business premises in November 2021 and relied on social media posts (Facebook) to infer that large events were conducted during the tax period. Based on the information, the department issued a show-cause notice and ultimately an assessment order dated 03 March 2022 proposing tax liabilities.

Allegations and defence

• Allegation: Conducting major events and collecting turnover without disclosing sales in GST returns.
• Defence: The petitioner said that most activity stopped due to the husband’s health and COVID restrictions; social media posts were promotional and not proof of realised turnover.
• Procedural point: Petitioner argued she was not given a fair hearing; the department says she was given time but did not file objections.

What the Court said
The Andhra Pradesh High Court examined the record and held:

• The petitioner was given opportunities to respond — personal hearing notices and time extensions were on record.
• Information from the petitioner’s own social media pages can prima facie be treated as evidence.
• Factual disputes about whether events actually took place are to be decided by the Appellate Authority / Tribunal, not by writ jurisdiction under Article 226.
• Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed, but the petitioner was given liberty to pursue remedies before the Appellate Authority.

Key takeaway— Assessment summary (from the order)
The assessing officer tabulated multiple events, dates and proposed turnovers (derived from Facebook posts). The aggregate tax demand included proposed IGST, CGST and SGST components for identified events.

Practical takeaways for business owners

1. Social posts are admissible evidence. Anything you publish about your business can be used by tax authorities to establish transactions or business activity.
2. Keep contemporaneous documentary proof. Contracts, invoices, cancellation notes, permission letters, bank receipts and client confirmations help rebut claims based on social media.
3. Appoint a representative (chartered accountant or lawyer) if you cannot personally respond to notices, and do not miss deadlines.
4. Understand the right remedy. Factual disputes must be taken up via appeal mechanisms rather than writ petitions in many cases.

The Andhra Pradesh High Court dismissed the writ petition by M/s. Sri Vasavi Wedding & Event Planners, after observing that social media content can prima facie support a tax assessment and that the petitioner had been given opportunities to respond. The court left factual disputes to the statutory appellate forum and allowed the petitioner to pursue her remedies before that authority.