BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 18.02.2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY & WMP.(MD)Nos.3695 & 3698 of 2026 Sri Ponkaliamman Contractor, 89, Kamarajar Colony, Mannachanallur Taluk, Trichy Through its Proprietor, R.Muthulakshmi ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Joint Commissioner (Appeals)

GST, Cantonment, Trichy.

2.The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer/

Lalgudi Assessment Circle, Lalgudi, Ariyalur, Trichy.

... Respondents Prayer:

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned orders passed by the 2^nd respondent in reference No.ZD330725357232H, dated 31.07.2025 and consequent summary order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 31.07.2025 under Section

74 of the GST Act and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to reclassify the proceedings under Section 73 of the GST Act treating the case as one involving delay in reporting and payment of tax.

For Petitioner : Mr.T.a.Ebenezer For Respondents : Mr.R.Suresh Kumar, Addl. Govt. Pleader.

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order passed by the 2^nd respondent in reference No.ZD330725357232H, dated 31.07.2025 and consequent summary order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 31.07.2025 under Section 74 of the GST Act and also seeking for a consequential direction, directing the respondents to reclassify the proceedings under Section 73 of the GST Act treating the case as one involving delay in reporting and payment of tax.

2. Mr.R.Suresh Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice on behalf of the respondents. By consent of the parties, the main writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

3. By consent of the parties, the main writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in this case, all notices/communications were uploaded by the respondents in the GST common portal. Since the petitioner was not aware of the said notices, they failed to file their reply within the time. Under these circumstances, the impugned order came to be passed by the respondents without providing any opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. Thereafter, summary order has been passed on 31.07.2025. As against the said order, the petitioner has filed an appeal before the 2^nd respondent. However, the said appeal was rejected on the ground that there is a delay in submission of appeal. Challenging the order passed by the 2^nd respondent dated 31.07.2025 and the consequential summary order dated 31.07.2025, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition.

5. Further, he would submit that now, the petitioner is willing to pay 25% of the disputed tax amount, to the respondents. Hence, he requests this Court to grant an opportunity to the petitioner to present their case before the respondents by setting aside the impugned orders.

6. On the other hand, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that the respondents had uploaded the notices in the GST Online Portal. But the petitioner failed to avail the said opportunity. Further, he has fairly admitted that no opportunity of personal hearing was provided to the petitioner prior to the passing of impugned order. Therefore, he requested this Court to remit the matter back to the respondents, subject to the payment of 25%

of the disputed tax amount as agreed by the petitioner.

7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents and also perused the materials available on record.

8. In the case on hand, it is evident that the show cause notice was uploaded on the GST Portal Tab. According to the petitioner, he was not aware of the issuance of the said show cause notice issued through the GST Portal and the original of the said show cause notice was not furnished to them. In such circums