Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 42359
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C. Saravanan, J
Samruddhi Transcorp Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner (ST), Alwarpet Assessment Circle – Respondent
W.M.P.Nos.17382 and 17384 of 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: V.Janarthanan
For the Respondents: T.N.C.Kaushik
A court may exercise its writ jurisdiction to remit a tax matter for de novo adjudication where the petitioner consents to a pre-deposit of a portion of the disputed tax, notwithstanding the expiry of the statutory appeal limitation period, provided strict compliance conditions are met.
Headnote:The petitioner challenged an assessment order dated 29.07.2025 issued under relevant GST enactments following a failure to participate in the Show Cause Notice proceedings. The court noted that the limitation period for filing a statutory appeal under Section 107 had expired by the time the writ petition was initiated. Considering the petitioner's willingness to deposit 25% of the disputed tax, the court framed the issue around whether a de novo adjudication could be permitted conditional upon pre-deposit. The Court highlighted that procedural fairness and compliance with statutory filing requirements are critical, but granted relief by remitting the matter back to the assessing authority subject to strict compliance. Ultimately, the writ petition was disposed of with the direction to remit the matter for fresh adjudication upon the petitioner's compliance with payment and filing stipulations, resulting in the vacation of bank attachments upon fulfillment of these conditions.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedural background and failure to exhaust statutory remedies. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. conditional remittance for de novo adjudication based on pre-deposit. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. consequences of compliance or failure to comply with court directives. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
ORDER
Mr.T.N.C.Kaushik, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the Respondents.
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 Respondents.
3. In this Writ Petition, the Petitioner has challenged the impugned Order dated 29.07.2025, which was preceded by a Show Cause Notice in GST DRC-01 dated 30.05.2025 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
29.07.2025.
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
15.04.2026.
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.
6. The learned counsel for the Petitioner has also made an following endorsement to that effect in the Court bundle which has been extracted hereunder:-
“It is submit that I undertake to deposit 25% of tax amount if the bank already recovered subject to verification.”
7. Recording the above consent given by the Petitioner, the case is remitted back to the 2nd 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 30.05.2025 together with requisite documents to substantiate the case by treating the impugned Order dated
29.07.2025 as an addendum to the Show Cause Notice dated 30.05.2025.
9. In case the Petitioner complies with the above stipulations, the 2nd 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. Needless to state, any amount recovered from the Petitioner / paid by the Petitioner, towards the tax liability confirmed vide impugned order, shall be adjusted towards the aforesaid pre-deposit of 25% as ordered above. This will be however subject to verification by the Respondents.
11. 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.
12. In case the Petitioner fails to comply with any of the stipulations, the
2nd 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. 13. Needless to state, before passing any such order, the 2nd Respondent shall give due notice to the Petitioner.
14. This Writ Petition stands disposed of with the above observations.
No costs. Connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
