Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 35774
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C. SARAVANAN, J
SRI SAI WEIGH BRIDGE Represented by its Proprietor Mrs.C.Komal – Appellant
Versus
The State Tax Officer (FAC) The Commissioner Tax Officer – Respondent
W.M.P.Nos.14969 & 14970 of 2026
For Petitioner(s): Mr.K.Sankaranarayanan
For Respondent(s):Mrs.P.Selvi Government Advocate
Writ petition remitted for de novo GST assessment adjudication upon 25% pre-deposit despite appeal limitation expiry.
Headnote:First Paragraph: The impugned assessment order dated 21.04.2025 under GST for F.Y.2022-23 was passed following a Show Cause Notice in GST DRC-01 dated 18.03.2024, to which no reply or personal hearing appearance was made by petitioner. Court noted expiry of limitation under Section 107 of GST enactments for appeal. Petitioner consented to pre-deposit 25% disputed tax for de novo adjudication. Second Paragraph: Issue framed as challenge to impugned order for being arbitrary and violative of natural justice principles. Ratio decidendi: Remand permissible with pre-deposit condition despite limitation expiry, enabling fresh adjudication on merits upon compliance. Third Paragraph: Writ petition disposed of; case remitted for fresh order subject to 25% deposit and reply filing; non-compliance allows recovery proceedings.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to gst order after scn ignored and appeal limitation expired (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. petitioner consents to 25% pre-deposit for remand (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. remand conditions with compliance consequences and petition disposal (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
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 21.04.2025, which was preceded by a Show Cause Notice in GST DRC-01 dated 18.03.2024 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
21.04.2025.
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
06.04.2026.
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 which has been extracted hereunder:-
“Agreed to pay 25% of tax.”
6. 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.
7. Within such time, the Petitioner shall also file a reply to the Show Cause Notice in GST DRC-01 dated 18.03.2024 together with requisite documents to substantiate the case by treating the impugned Order dated
21.04.2025 as an addendum to the Show Cause Notice dated 18.03.2024.
8. 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.
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 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. 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.
