SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 16090

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice C. SARAVANAN
Kannippan Arumugan – Appellant
Versus
The Assistant Commissioner ST – Respondent



##PAGE1##

W.P.No.2943 of 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 30.01.2026

CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

W.P.No.2943 of 2026

and

W.M.P.Nos.3290 and 3291 of 2026

Mr.Kannippan Arumugan

Sole Proprietor of

Tvl. P A TRADERS

No.1A/2, Munniyappan Nagar Main Road,

Selliyamman Nagar Extn, Nerkunram

Chennai. ... Petitioner

Vs.

The Assistant Commissioner (ST)

Saligramam Assessment Circle,

Central 1, Chennai Central

No.307, 3rd Floor,

Mylapore Taluk office Building,

Greenways Road, Chennai-600 028. ... Respondent

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for

issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records and

seeking quash of the Impugned Order in Original vide GSTIN

33ACXPA8247L1Z3/2022-23, dated 21.07.2025 along with DRC-07

Ref.No.ZD330725212398B on the file of the Respondent, as it is arbitrary

and bad in law, with a consequential direction to the Respondent to permit

rectification of the inadvertent error in GSTR-1 and drop the proceedings.

1/7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/02/2026 12:55:08 pm )

##PAGE2##

W.P.No.2943 of 2026

For Petitioner : M/s.Jayalakshmi.P

For Respondent : M/s.K.Vasanthamala,

Government Advocate

***************

O R D E R

M/s.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 21.07.2025 in Form GST DRC-07 passed for the tax period 2022–

2023, whereby the demand proposed in the Show Cause Notice dated

30.05.2023 has been confirmed against the petitioner.

4. The impugned assessment order has been passed after

considering the petitioner’s reply to the aforesaid Show Cause Notice in

2/7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/02/2026 12:55:08 pm )

##PAGE3##

W.P.No.2943 of 2026

Form DRC-01 dated 30.05.2023. It is evident that the dispute arose on

account of a mistake committed by the petitioner in filing GSTR-01 for the

said tax period.

5. It appears that by mistake, instead of Rs.1,31,280.30/-, the

petitioner had mentioned Rs.2,54,040.30/- in the returns as the tax liability in

respect of the supply made to Tvl.Innoforge Pvt Ltd vide invoice

No.PAT/017/22-23 dated 24.03.2023.

6. This error may have facilitated the said recipient, namely M/s.

Innoforge Private Limited, to avail excess Input Tax Credit of Rs.1,22,760/-

(Rs.2,54,040.30 – Rs.1,31,280.30).

7. The records filed before this Court reveal that in Form GSTR-3B

filed by the petitioner, the petitioner has correctly determined the taxable

value of the petitioner as Rs. 14,58,670/- for the relevant tax period.

3/7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/02/2026 12:55:08 pm )

##PAGE4##

W.P.No.2943 of 2026

8. Ideally, the petitioner ought to have issued a sales return credit

note or rectified the mistake by filing a rectification application at the

appropriate time. However, the petitioner failed to do so and has acted only

after the issuance of the Show Cause Notice in Form DRC-01 dated

30.05.2023, which has now culminated in the impugned order dated

21.07.2025.

9. Even if the credit was availed by M/s. Innoforge Private Limited

on the strength of auto-populated GSTR-2A/2B, it would amount to excess

Input Tax Credit having been availed by the said recipient. It is further

noticed that the petitioner has not obtained any certificate from M/s.

Innoforge Private Limited clarifying this aspect.

10. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

M/s. Innoforge Private Limited is not cooperating with the petitioner and has

not issued the certificate duly certified by a Chartered Accountant stating

whether the Input Tax Credit was availed based on the tax amount mentioned

in the invoice dated 24.03.2023. This, according to the petitioner, is a private

dispute between the petitioner and M/s. Innoforge Private Limited.

4/7

https://www.mhc.t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top