2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 14327
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.SARAVANAN, J
Logas Technologies – Appellant
Versus
The State Tax Officer, Chintadripet Assessment Circle – Respondent
Writ Petition | W.M.P.Nos.6762 and 6764 of 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.G.Shivakumar
For the Respondents:Mrs.P.Selvi Government Advocate
A petitioner may challenge a tax order despite missed deadlines by complying with specific conditions for remittance and adjudication.
Headnote:This writ petition was filed under Article 226 against an order of the Respondent dated 22.02.2025, following a show cause notice with a failed hearing. The court noted the expiry of the appeal period under Section 107 of the GST enactments but permitted the Petitioner to deposit 25% of the disputed tax for fresh adjudication. The Court emphasized balancing interests between the Assessee and Revenue, remitting the matter for fresh determination on merits. The final outcome confirming the decision enables the Petitioner to proceed, subject to stipulated conditions.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenging a tax order following failure to appear. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 2. petitioner willing to comply with conditions for reconsideration. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 3. court allows remission for fresh tax order pending conditions. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. final disposition of the writ petition with observations. (Para 15) |
ORDER
Mrs.P.Selvi, 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. In this Writ Petition, the Petitioner has challenged the impugned Order dated 22.02.2025, which was preceded by a Show Cause Notice in GST DRC-01 dated 26.11.2024 wherein the Petitioner was called upon to appear for personal hearing. However, the Petitioner had not taken advantage of the same and thus, suffered the impugned Order dated 22.02.2025.
4. The Petitioner was also issued with Reminder on 27.01.2025, which called upon the Petitioner to file a reply and to appear for a personal hearing. The Petitioner however neither filed any reply nor appeared for the personal hearing fixed on 31.01.2025. Thus, the impugned Order has been passed.
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. The present Writ Petition has been filed only on 09.02.2026.
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 and he has also made an endorsement to that effect in the Court bundle.
7. The learned Government Advocate for the Respondent has however no objection for the same.
8. Under similar circumstances, Orders have been quashed and cases have been remitted back to the Respondent to pass a fresh order on terms subject to such Assessee depositing 25% to 100% of the disputed tax depending upon the length of delay in approaching the Court. I do not find any reason to take a different view in this case.
9. Therefore, to balance the interest of both parties viz., the Assessee and the Revenue, 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.
10. Within such time, the Petitioner shall also file a reply to the Show Cause Notice in GST DRC-01 dated 26.11.2024 together with requisite documents to substantiate the case by treating the impugned Order dated
22.02.2025 as an addendum to the Show Cause Notice dated 26.11.2024.
11. 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.
12. 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.
13. 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.
14. Needless to state, before passing any such order, the Respondent shall give due notice to the Petitioner.
15. This Writ Petition stands disposed of with the above observations. No costs. Connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.