Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 30986
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C. SARAVANAN, J
Tvl WILKINSON WORKHOLDING INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
The Assistant Commissioner (ST) Chengalpattu Assessment circle – Respondent
WMP.No.12811 and 12816 of 2026
For Petitioner(s): Mr.Kamala Kanth S
For Respondent(s):Mrs.P.Selvi, Government Advocate
Remand to Appellate Authority for de novo adjudication upon 25% pre-deposit despite expired appeal limitation.
Headnote:The petitioner challenged a GST assessment order dated 27.02.2025 under Article 226, issued after a show cause notice dated 25.11.2024 without personal hearing attendance. Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017 governs appeals with a time limit that had expired. The court noted the petitioner's willingness to pre-deposit 25% of disputed tax for de novo adjudication. The matter was remitted to the Appellate Authority for fresh consideration upon pre-deposit. The writ petition was disposed of with directions for expeditious disposal and conditional vacation of bank attachment.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to gst order post-expired appeal limitation. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. petitioner's offer of 25% pre-deposit. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. remand for de novo adjudication with conditions. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
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 27.02.2025, which was preceded by a Show Cause Notice in GST DRC-01 dated 25.11.2024 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 27.02.2025
4. 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 23.03.2026
5. 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.
6. The learned counsel for the Petitioner has also made an endorsement to that effect in the Court bundle, which is extracted hereunder:-
“ The Petitioner is allow and accepted the 25% of tax dispute.”
7. In view of the above, the case is remitted back to the Appellate Authority 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.
8. In case the Petitioner complies with the above stipulations, the Appellate Authority 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.
9. 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.
10. In case the Petitioner fails to comply with any of the stipulations, the Appellate Authority 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.
11. Needless to state, before passing any such order, the Respondent shall give due notice to the Petitioner.
12. This Writ Petition stands disposed of with the above observations. No costs. Connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
