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) 39141

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C. SARAVANAN, J
Lasar Samuvel – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner (ST) – Respondent
WMP Nos.14292 & 14293 of 2026



Advocates:
For Petitioner(s): Mr.S.Rajasekar
For Respondent(s):Ms.Amirtha Poonkodi Dinakaran Government Advocate

Waiver of excess late fee and general penalty under GST for delayed GSTR-9 filings before amnesty notification, limited to Rs.10,000 late fee.

Headnote:Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner challenged GST proceedings for delayed GSTR-9 filing for 2018-2019, including Form GST DRC-07 summary order imposing late fee and penalty. Court relied on prior ruling citing Himachal Pradesh High Court in M/s.R.T.Pharma Vs. Union of India, extending benefits of Notification No.7/2023-Central Tax as amended, waiving excess late fee beyond Rs.10,000 and general penalty under S.125 where specific late fee under S.47 applies. Matter remitted for fresh consideration on merits. Issue covered by earlier order in Ms.Kandan Hardware Mart Vs. The Assistant Commissioner (ST), holding taxpayers filing GSTR-9 before 01.04.2023 entitled to amnesty notifications; general penalty under S.125 not imposable alongside late fee under S.47. Ratio emphasizes waiver for pre-deadline filings and limits penalties to Rs.10,000 late fee. Writ petition disposed; case remitted to respondent for appropriate orders on merits within 30 days; no costs.

Table of Content
1. disposed at admission with consent. (Para 2)
2. issue covered by prior precedent on gst late fee waiver. (Para 3)
3. remitted for fresh orders within 30 days; petition disposed. (Para 4 , 5)

ORDER

Ms.Amirtha Poonkodi Dinakaran, 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 issue is prima facie covered by an order of this Court in the case of Ms.Kandan Hardware Mart Vs. The Assistant Commissioner (ST)(FAC) in W.P.No.27029 of 2023 vide order dated 02.01.2026, wherein, it has been held as under:-

“205. The Division Bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of M/s.R.T.Pharma Vs. Union of India and others, while dealing with a similar issue arising out of delay in filing of the “Annual Returns” in GSTR-9 under Section 39 of the respective GST Enactments held that it would be unjust to deny a “Late Fee”, waiver to a taxpayer who filed their Goods and Services Tax (GST) Annual Returns (GSTR-9 and GSTR-9C) before a specific Amnesty Notification was issued in Notification No.7/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023, and was amended by Notification No.25/2023-Central Tax dated 17.07.2023 206. Therefore, the benefit of the above Notifications namely Notification No.7/2023- Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 as amended by Notification No.25/2023-Central tax dated 17.07.2023 has to be extended to all those Petitioners in Table –

4A who had filed the returns before 01.04.2023.

207. Since these Petitioners are liable to pay “Late Fee”

the question of imposing “General Penalty” under Section 125 of the respective GST Enactments cannot be countenanced in view of the reasons that “General Penalty” under Section 125 of the respective GST Enactments can be imposed only in the absence of ‘any other penalty’ under the respective GST Enactments.

208. It is therefore held that the Petitioners in Table-4A are neither liable for “Late Fee” over and above Rs.10,000/- under each of the respective GST Enactments nor liable for “General Penalty” under Section 125 of the respective GST Enactments.

209. As far as the case of Petitioners in Table-4B namely the Petitioners in W.P.No.19967 of 2023 and W.P.Nos.23356, 30854, 9867 of 2024 and W.P.Nos.47726, 38007, 48941 of 2025 are concerned, they have been subjected to only “Late Fee” under Section 47(2) of the respective GST Enactments. They have not been subjected to “General Penalty” under Section 125 of the respective GST Enactments.

210. Since these Petitioners have also filed the “Annual Returns” before 01.04.2023, they cannot be subjected to “Late Fee” over and above Rs.10,000/- under each of the respective GST Enactments as ordered in the case of those Petitioners in Table-4A

211. As far as the case of Petitioner in Table-4C namely the Petitioner in W.P.No.3915 of 2024 is concerned, the said Petitioner has filed the “Annual Return” only on 19.01.2024 for the Tax Period 2020-2021. It was within the time under Section 44(2) of the respective GST Enactments as the said date would have expired on 31.12.2024. However, there is no scope for granting any waiver from payment of “Late Fee” under section 47 of the respective GST Enactments, as it was long after the date specified in Section 44(1) of the respective GST Enactments read with Rule 80(1) of the respective GST Rules. The said Petitioner has been imposed with “General Penalty” of Rs.25,000/- each under Section 125 of the respective GST Enactments. There is no scope for imposing “General Penalty” under Section 125 of the respective GST Enactments for the reasons stated for the other Petitioners. Therefore, to that extent W.P.No.3915 of 2024 deserves to be allowed.

212. In the result, (i)W.P.Nos.3540, 3567, 3570, 3902 and 3966 of 2024 as detailed in Table-3 are allowed. Therefore, “General Penalty” imposed under Section 125 of the respectiv

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