Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 41230
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C. Saravanan, J
M/s Vasavi Store – Appellant
Versus
The Deputy State Tax officer 2 Haruru Assessment Circle – Respondent
WMP Nos. 18141 & 18143 of 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.M. Parvesh Musharaf
For the Respondents: Mr.TNC.Kaushik
Court may remit matter for de novo adjudication on pre-deposit of a portion of disputed tax after limitation period.
Headnote:The Petitioner has challenged an impugned order passed by the Respondent under the GST enactments. The Petitioner was served a show cause notice but did not respond and subsequently the limitation for filing appeal also expired. The main issue before the Court is whether the Petitioner should be allowed an opportunity for de novo adjudication by making a pre-deposit. The Court remitted the matter back to Respondent for fresh adjudication subject to the Petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax within thirty (30) days.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition disposed at admission stage with consent of parties. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. impugned order challenged after limitation period expired. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. pre-deposit condition for de novo adjudication ordered. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. compliance conditions and consequences in case of default stated. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
ORDER
Mr.TNC.Kaushik, learned Additional Government Pleader 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 Additional Government Pleader for the Respondent.
3. In this Writ Petition, the Petitioner has challenged the impugned Order dated 12.11.2025, which was preceded by a Show Cause Notice in GST DRC-01 dated 24.09.2025 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
12.11.2025.
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
24.04.2026.
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:-
“The Petitioner has to pay 25% of disputed 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 24.09.2025 together with requisite documents to substantiate the case by treating the impugned Order dated
12.11.2025 as an addendum to the Show Cause Notice dated 24.09.2025.
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. No costs. Connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
