Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 31415
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.Saravanan, J
Chinnasamy Subbarayan Proprietor of Tvl.C.Subbarayan – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Commercial Tax Officer Manali Assessment Circle – Respondent
W.M.P.Nos.11886 and 11889 of 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.A.G.Sathyanarayana
For the Respondents:Mrs.P.Selvi Government Advocate
Writ court remands GST assessment order for fresh adjudication upon petitioner's consent to 25% pre-deposit despite expired appeal limitation.
Headnote:The petitioner challenged an impugned order dated 19/2/2025 issued under GST provisions following a show cause notice dated 26/11/2024 in GST DRC-01, to which no reply or personal hearing appearance was made. The court noted the expired limitation for appeal under Section 107 of GST enactments. The court remitted the matter for de novo adjudication subject to pre-deposit conditions. The primary issue was the validity of the impugned order due to non-response and the availability of appellate remedy. The court observed that despite expired appeal limitation, writ jurisdiction permitted remand with conditions given the petitioner's consent to pre-deposit. The writ petition was disposed of, remitting the case back for fresh order on merits upon compliance with 25% pre-deposit and filing reply, with bank attachment vacated upon fulfillment.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition challenges gst order post non-response to scn; appeal limitation expired. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. petitioner consents to 25% pre-deposit for remand. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. remand for de novo order upon pre-deposit and reply; non-compliance allows recovery. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 13) |
ORDER
Ms.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 19/2/2025, which was preceded by a Show Cause Notice in GST DRC-01 dated 26/11/2024, wherein the Petitioner was called upon to file a reply and to appear for a personal hearing. However, the Petitioner did not take advantage of the same and has thus suffered the impugned Order dated 19/2/2025.
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 long before. However, the present Writ Petition has been filed only on
13/3/2026.
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 and he has also made an endorsement to that effect in the Court bundle.
6. The learned counsel for the Petitioner has also made an following endorsement to that effect which has been extracted hereunder:-
“Pleased to remand back with a condition to lift bank attachment further deposit 25% on tax amount.”
7. Recording the above consent given by the Petitioner, 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.
8. 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
19/2/2025 as an addendum to the Show Cause Notice dated 26/11/2024.
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. 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. 12. Needless to state, before passing any such order, the Respondent shall give due notice to the Petitioner.
13. This Writ Petition stands disposed of with the above observations. No costs. Connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
