logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 MHC 6194 print Preview print Next print
Court : Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
Case No : W.P. (MD). No. 21949 of 2026 & W.M.P. (MD). Nos. 16380 & 16382 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C. SARAVANAN
Parties : Sri Valli Jewellery, represented by its Partner Kumar Versus The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (State Tax), Virudhunagar & Another
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: V.S. Arihara Sudhan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Sudarkodi Natchiyar, Counsel for the State of Tamil Nadu.
Date of Judgment : 04-08-2026
Head Note :-
Constitution of India - Article 226 -
Summary :-
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:
- Article 226 of the Constitution of India

2. Catch Words:
- Writ of Certiorari
- Mandamus
- Show cause notice
- Pre‑deposit of disputed tax
- Bank attachment
- Remand
- Fresh order

3. Summary:
- The petitioner challenged an order dated 22‑09‑2025 issued by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer under GST provisions.
- The petitioner had failed to respond to the show‑cause notice and subsequent reminders.
- During the hearing, the petitioner offered to deposit 25 % of the disputed tax as a condition for a fresh adjudication.
- The court, by consent, quashed the impugned order and remitted the matter to the respondent to pass a fresh order, subject to the petitioner’s deposit.
- The petitioner must file a reply to the original show‑cause notice within thirty days and the bank attachment will be lifted upon compliance.
- If the petitioner fails to comply, the respondent may recover the tax as if the petition were dismissed.
- The writ petition is disposed of with no costs, and related miscellaneous petitions are closed.

4. Conclusion:
Petition Allowed
Judgment :-

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the order passed in Order No.ZP330925277356Y/2021-2022/ dated 22.09.2025/ GSTIN 33ADLFS1929E1Z4 in respect of the periods from April 2021-March 2022 passed by the 2nd respondent/ The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer /The Deputy State Tax Officer -2, Rajapalayam-I, Assessment Circle and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to reconsider the matter.)

1. Ms.P.Sudarkodi Natchiyar, learned counsel for the State of Tamil Nadu, takes notice for the respondents.

2. By consent, this writ petition is disposed of at the time of admission after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents.

3. This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order passed by the second respondent bearing Ref. No.ZP330925277356Y/2021-2022 dated 22.09.2025 GSTIN No. 33ADLFS1929E1Z4, for the assessment year 2021-22, which was preceded by a show cause notice in Form GST DRC-01 dated 23.05.2025.

4. The petitioner was also issued with reminders on 25.06.2025, 10.07.2025 and 23.07.2025, which called upon the petitioner to file a reply and to appear for a personal hearing. The Petitioner however neither filed any reply nor appeared for personal hearings. Thus, the impugned order has been passed.

5. When the matter is taken up for hearing today, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is willing to pre-deposit 25% of the disputed tax as a condition for de novo adjudication and has also made an endorsement to that effect in the Court Bundle, which reads as under:-

                   “It is respectfully submit that the petitioner undertakes to deposit 25% of the disputed tax amount.”

6. Recording the same, the impugned order passed by the second respondent bearing Order No.ZP330925277356Y/2021-2022/ dated 22.09.2025/GSTIN 33ADLFS1929E1Z4 is hereby quashed and the case is remitted back to the second respondent to pass a fresh order subject to the petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax in cash from the petitioner's electronic cash register within a period of thirty 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 23.05.2025 together with requisite documents to substantiate the case by treating the impugned order dated 22.09.2025 as an addendum to the show cause notice dated 23.05.2025.

8. In case, the petitioner complies with the above stipulations, the second 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 months of such reply/pre-deposit. Subject to the petitioner complying with the above stipulations, the attachment of the bank account of the petitioner shall also stand automatically vacated.

9. It is made clear that the bank attachment shall be lifted subject to the deposit of 25% of the disputed tax as ordered above and the petitioner and the partners of 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 second 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 second respondent shall issue due notice on the petitioner.

12. This Writ Petition stands disposed of with the above observations. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
 
  CDJLawJournal