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) 47263

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G. Jayachandran, N. Mala, JJ
Sabeena Traders – Appellant
Versus
State Tax Officer – Respondent
WA No. 1110 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Vaani Srikant Iyer
For the Respondents: Amirta Poongodi Dinakaran

A writ petition is not maintainable to challenge an assessment order when the assessee has failed to participate in the personal hearing and has bypassed the available statutory appeal process.

Headnote:The case involves a challenge to an assessment order for the financial year 2018-2019 under the Goods and Services Tax Act. The appellant failed to participate in the personal hearing despite notice and neglected to pursue a statutory appeal within the prescribed timeframe, filing a writ petition instead after a lapse of ten months. The court held that a party who fails to participate in available statutory remedies and personal hearings cannot subsequently invoke writ jurisdiction to challenge an assessment order. The central issue is whether a writ petition is maintainable when an assessee voluntarily fails to participate in the personal hearing and bypasses the statutory appeal process. Relying on the principle that judicial review is not an alternative to statutory appeals, the court ruled that the appellant's failure to avail of the personal hearing and statutory appeal process precluded the maintainability of the writ petition. The Writ Appeal is dismissed, and the order of the learned single Judge is upheld.

Table of Content
1. failure to participate in personal hearings and statutory appeals bars writ petition. (Para 1)
2. writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked to bypass statutory remedies after willful abstention. (Para 2)
3. dismissal of appeal for lack of merit due to failure to exhaust statutory remedies. (Para 3)

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by Dr.G.Jayachandran J.)

The Assessment Order, dated 26.04.2024, came to be challenged by way of a writ petition, filed after ten months. The assessment was in respect of the year 2018-2019. Therefore, the learned single Judge had taken note of the fact that the show cause notice was first issued on 04.01.2024, for which the assessee replied on 01.02.2024. Thereafter, an opportunity of personal hearing was granted to the assessee, but the assessee had not availed the said opportunity. Having failed to avail the opportunity despite notice and suffered the assessment order, even without preferring a statutory appeal, after a lapse of ten months, the writ petition was filed, challenging the impugned order. Therefore, the learned single Judge rightly held that the appellant/writ petitioner had voluntarily given up the opportunity of personal hearing before the Assessing Officer and thereafter failed to file a statutory appeal against the assessment order within time. Hence, the assessment order cannot be challenged by way of a writ petition by the assessee, taking advantage of its own omission. The order of the learned single Judge has been challenged, stating that the learned single Judge has erred in dismissing the writ petition, which is in violation of principles of natural justice.

2. This Court finds that the said ground of attack is not sustainable for two reasons. Primarily, in the matter pertaining to the Assessment Year 2018- 2019 for which the assessee, who initially participated in the show cause notice, conveniently abstained himself from participating in the further enquiry, despite notice of personal hearing. Secondly, having suffered the assessment order, dated 26.04.2024, though there is a statutory appeal provision available under Section 107 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, the assessee, by conveniently bypassing and forgoing the right of filing a statutory appeal, had chosen to file the writ petition and still contending that there is no tax liability, the fact which should have been agitated during the personal hearing or by way of a statutory appeal.

3. Hence, we do not find any merit in this Writ Appeal. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected C.M.P.No.11039 of 2026 is closed.

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