2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 12837
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice C. SARAVANAN
Tvl Roshan Agency – Appellant
Versus
The Assistant Commissioner (State Tax) – Respondent
##PAGE1##
W.P.No.25753 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 28.01.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN
W.P.No.25753 of 2024
Tvl. Roshan Agency,
Rep. by its Proprietor – Madan Lal,
No.46, Malayaperumal Street,
Chennai – 600001. ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Assistant Commissioner (State Tax)
Kothawalchavadi Assessment Circle, North-1
Integrated Commercial Taxes Office Complex,
Room No.32, Elephant Gate Bridge Road,
Chennai – 600003.
2. The Bank Manager,
Karur Vysya Bank,
New No.37, Old No.13,
Godown Street, Chennai – 600001.
3. The State Tax Officer,
Office of Commercial Tax Officer,
Kothawalchavadi, Assessment Circle,
Chennai North-I,
Integrated Commercial Taxes Offices Complex,
Room No.234, 3rd Floor, No. 1275/3,
Bridge Road, Vepery, Chennai – 600003. ... Respondents
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/02/2026 01:35:53 pm )
##PAGE2##W.P.No.25753 of 2024
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for
issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records on the
files of 1st Respondent in his impugned proceedings made in
Roc.No.33ADXPP2894H1ZU/2024 dated 03.05.2024 vide Form GST
DRC-13 issued to the 2nd Respondent Bank for attaching the Bank Account of
the Petitioner, quash the same and further direct the 1st Respondent to lift the
Bank Attachment by withdrawing the letter issued in
Roc.No.33ADXPP2894H1ZU/2024 dated 03.05.2024 vide Form GST
DRC-13 to the 2nd Respondent Bank.
For Petitioner : Mr.J.Abhishek
For R1 & R3 : Mr.C.Harsha Raj
Special Government Pleader
ORDER
The petitioner is before this Court against the impugned recovery
proceedings along with the statutory demand notice in Form GST DRC-13
both dated 03.05.2024 which issued against the petitioner for the recovery of
demand confirmed for the Financial Year 2021-2022 vide Assessment Order
dated 07.11.2023.
2/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/02/2026 01:35:53 pm )
##PAGE3##W.P.No.25753 of 2024
2. It is noticed that two Assessment Orders were passed for the same
financial year (2021-2022) and on the same issue by the 1st Respondent on
11.05.2023 and the 3rd Respondent on 07.11.2023 respectively.
3. It is in this background the petitioner filed an application dated
16.12.2023 under Section 161 of the respective GST enactments for
rectification of the Order dated 07.11.2023. The demand was subsequently
dropped pursuant to a Rectification Order dated 27.05.2024.
4. No doubt, there was a mistake on the part of the department in
passing two separate orders on the same issue and for the same period, which
were covered by the Rectification Order dated 27.05.2024.
5. It is further noticed that the petitioner filed an appeal on 21.12.2023
against the Assessment Order dated 11.05.2023, which came to be rejected by
an Order dated 29.04.2025 on the ground of limitation. However, the
petitioner already pre-deposited 10% of the disputed tax at the time of filing
of an appeal dated 21.12.2023.
3/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/02/2026 01:35:53 pm )
##PAGE4##W.P.No.25753 of 2024
6. Against the impugned Assessment Order dated 11.05.2023, the
appeal was admittedly filed beyond the statutory period of limitation. The
Assessment Order dated 11.05.2023 was passed without the petitioner’s
participation in the Assessment proceedings by filing a reply to the Show
Cause Notice dated 23.03.2023 that preceded the aforesaid order or by
appearing for the personal hearing on the date fixed for personal hearing in
the aforesaid notice.
7. Taking note of the overall facts and circumstances of the case,
considering the fact that the petitioner had approached the appellate authority
although belatedly and following the consistent view taken under similar
circumstances, the case is remitted back to the 1st respondent to redo the
exercise and to pass a fresh order on merits in lieu of order dated 11.05.2023,
subject to the petitioner depositing 40% of the disputed tax confirmed vide
Assessment Order dated 11.05.2023 (in addition to the 10% already
deposited