IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 27-01-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C. SARAVANAN AND WMP NO. 2847 OF 2026,WMP NO. 2849 OF 2026 Prajith Enterprises Rep by its Proprietor Deepa.

Plot No. 274, Indira Nagar, Vellore, Tamil nadu 632009 ..Petitioner(s)

Vs State Tax Officer Vellore Rural Assessment circle, No 4, fort Round Road, Vellore 632 001 ..Respondent(s)

PRAYER Writ Petition filed under Art. 226 of Constitution of India seeking for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the impugned order in GSTIN 33DXUPD3186A1ZK FY 2021-22 dated 15.04.2025 and its consequential Demand Order dated 15.04.2025 having Reference No.

ZD330425109312X issued by the Respondent and quash the same.

For Petitioner(s): Mr. Sanskar Samdaria S For Respondent(s): Mrs.K.Vasanthamala, Government Advocate

ORDER

Mrs.K.Vasanthamala, learned Government Advocate takes notice for the Respondent.

2.This Writ Petition is 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 Respondent.

3.The Petitioner is before this Court against the impugned order dated

15.04.2025 in Form GST DRC-07 passed under Section 73 of the respective GST Enactments for the tax period 2021-2022, which was preceded by a Show Cause Notice and thus suffered the impugned order. By the impugned order, Late Fee under Section 47(2) of the respective GST Enactments and also General Penalty under Section 125 of the respective GST Enactments has been imposed as detailed below :-

4.The petitioner has challenged the impugned order on the ground that another Assessment Order dated 13.05.2025 was passed for the same tax period, wherein also the petitioner has been subjected to a penalty of Rs.50,000/- for the same tax period.

5.Facts on record reveal that the petitioner has preferred an appeal on

11.08.2025 against the aforesaid Assessment Order dated 13.05.2025 before the Appellate Authority.

6. The learned counsel for petitioner submitted that both General Penalty and Late Fee go hand in glove. The learned counsel for petitioner further submitted that the issue has also now attained clarity in terms of decision rendered by this Court in Ms.Kandan Hardware Mart, Represented by its Proprietor E.Palani vs. The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC), Park Town Assessment Circle, Chennai – 600 003 in W.P.No.27029 of 2023, dated

02.01.2026 wherein it has been observed as under:-

“203. To single them out would amount to hostile discrimination and contrary to Article 14 of the Constitution of India. To suspend “Late Fee” would also lead to mistrust in the tax administration and would be an anathema to Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

204. To single out would amount to arbitrary exercise of law failing the test of arbitrariness recognized under Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

205. The Division Bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of M/s.R.T.Pharma Vs. Union of India and others, while dealing with a similar issue arising out of delay in filing of the “Annual Returns” in GSTR-9 under Section 39 of the respective GST Enactments held that it would be unjust to deny a “Late Fee”, waiver to a taxpayer who filed their Goods and Services Tax (GST) Annual Returns (GSTR-9 and GSTR-9C) before a specific Amnesty Notification was issued in Notification No.7/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023, and was amended by Notification No.25/2023-Central Tax dated 17.07.2023.

206……..

207. Since these Petitioners are liable to pay “Late Fee”, the question of imposing “General Penalty” under Section 125 of the respective GST Enactments cannot be countenanced in view of the reasons that “General Penalty” under Section 125 of the respective GST Enactments can be imposed only in the absence of ‘any other penalty’ under the respective GST Enactments.”

7. The learn