Back
2026 Supreme(Mad) 1522
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C. SARAVANAN, J.
M/s. Arusuvai Agro Products India Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner (ST), Krishnagiri – Respondent
WP Nos. 13401, 13410, 13428, 13434 of 2026, WMP Nos. 14623, 14624, 14632, 14633, 14647, 14649, 14653, 14654 of 2026
Decided On : 15-04-2026
For the Appellant : K. Aarthy
For the Respondent: P. Selvi
Courts exercising writ jurisdiction may remand GST assessment cases for fresh adjudication despite expired appeal limitation where petitioner undertakes pre-deposit of disputed tax percentage.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Section 107 - Challenge to assessment orders - Writ petition seeking certiorari for quashing of orders due to lapse of limitation period for statutory appeal - Court remits matters for fresh adjudication subject to pre-deposit of disputed tax - Show cause notice treated as continuing - Petitioner directed to file reply within time with supporting documents - Bank attachment vacated subject to compliance. (B.
Facts of the case:
Petitioner challenged four assessment orders passed under GST regime for different periods. Each impugned order followed a show cause notice calling for reply and personal hearing. Petitioner did not utilize opportunity at assessment stage. Statutory appeal period under Section 107 had already expired by the date of filing writ petitions. Petitioner undertook to pay specified percentage of tax demand for remand of cases.
Findings of Court:
Court accepted petitioner's undertakings for pre-deposit and remitted all matters for fresh adjudication on merits. Petitioner required to deposit 25% or 100% of disputed tax per case within thirty days. Reply to show cause notice to be filed within same period treating impugned orders as addendums. Respondent directed to pass fresh orders within three months of compliance.
Issues: Whether writ petitions should be entertained despite expiry of statutory limitation for appeals; whether conditional remand for fresh adjudication is justified; scope of court's exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 to grant relief in tax matters where alternative statutory remedy has become time-barred.
Ratio Decidendi: When statutory limitation for appeal has expired and writ petitioner expresses willingness to pre-deposit specified percentage of disputed tax and file reply, court exercising writ jurisdiction is entitled to remand the matters for fresh adjudication on merits treating the impugned orders as part of show cause proceedings subject to strict compliance with conditions.
Result: Writ petitions disposed of by remitting all cases for denovo adjudication subject to pre-deposit of disputed tax as ordered and filing of replies within stipulated time. Bank attachments vacated conditionally. Connected writ miscellaneous petitions closed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. multiple writ petitions filed by same petitioner challenging gst orders (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. writ petitions disposed with directions (Para 2 , 44) |
| 3. impugned gst orders passed without reply and limitation period expired (Para 4 , 5 , 14 , 15 , 24 , 34) |
| 4. petitioner offers pre-deposit for remand and denovo adjudication (Para 6 , 7 , 16 , 17 , 26 , 27 , 36 , 37) |
| 5. writ petitions remitted for fresh orders subject to pre-deposit and reply filing (Para 8 , 9 , 18 , 19 , 28 , 29 , 38 , 39) |
| 6. bank attachment to be vacated upon compliance with conditions (Para 10 , 11 , 20 , 21 , 30 , 31 , 40 , 41) |
| 7. non-compliance may lead to recovery proceedings (Para 12 , 22 , 32 , 42 , 43) |
ORDER :
1. Mrs. Selvi, the learned Government Advocate, takes notice on behalf of the Respondents.
2. By this Common Order, the following Writ Petitions are being disposed of at the stage of admission itself with the consent of the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Government Advocate for the Respondents.
3. The Petitioner is before this Court against the impugned orders as detailed below:
Demand Details
(Amount in Rs)
WP.No.13401 of 2026
4. In this Writ Petition, the Petitioner has challenged the impugned Order dated 02.06.2025, which was preceded by a Show Cause Notice in GST DRC-01 dated 29.05.2024 wherein the Petitioner was called upon to file a reply and to appear for a personal hearing. However, the Petitioner did not take advantage of the same and has thus, suffered the impugned Order dated 29.05.2024
5. It is noticed that the limitation for filing an appeal under Section 107 of the respective GST enactments, 2017 against the impugned Order has already expired long before. However, the present Writ Petition has been filed only on 02.04.2026
6. At this stage, the learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is willing to pre-deposit 25% of the disputed tax as a condition for denovo adjudication.
7. The learned counsel for the Petitioner has also made an endorsement to that effect in the Court bundle, which is extracted hereunder:-
“The Petitioner undertakes to pay 25% of tax demand for remanding the case to the respondent.”
8. Recording the above consent, the case is remitted back to the Respondent to pass a fresh order on merits subject to the Petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax in cash or from the Petitioner's Electronic Cash Register within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
9. Within such time, the Petitioner shall also file a reply to the Show Cause Notice in GST DRC-01 dated 29.05.2024 together with requisite documents to substantiate the case by treating the impugned Order dated 02.06.2025 as an addendum to the Show Cause Notice dated 29.05.2024.
10. In case the Petitioner complies with the above stipulations, the Respondent shall proceed to pass a final order on merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of three (3) months of such reply/pre-deposit. Subject to the Petitioner complying with the above stipulations, the attachment of the bank account of the Petitioner if any, shall also stand automatically vacated.
11. It is made clear that bank attachment shall be lifted subject to the Petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax as ordered above and the Petitioner not being in arrears of any other amount for any other tax period barring the amount demanded under the impugned Order.
12. In case the Petitioner fails to comply with any of the stipulations, the Respondent is at liberty to proceed against the Petitioner to recover the tax in accordance with law as if this Writ Petition was dismissed in limine today.
13. Needless to state, before passing any such order, the Respondent shall give due notice to the Petitioner.
WP.No.13410 of 2026
14. In this Writ Petition, the Petitioner has challenged the impugned Order dated 15.12.2023, which was preceded by a Show Cause Notice in GST DRC-01 dated 09.10.2023 wherein the Peti
