The Coonoor Tea Estates Company Private Limited Vs The Deputy Tax Officer 2 (St)

¶1

W.P.No.7407 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Dated : 10.03.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

¶6

W.P.No.7407 of 2025

¶7

& W.M.P.Nos.8280, 8282 & 8283 of 2025

¶8

The Coonoor Tea Estates Company Private Limited, Door No.49, Coonoor Tea Estate, Springfield Post, Coonoor 643 104 now known as: M/s.Matheson Bosanquet Enterprises Private Limited, Post Box No.1, Spring Field Post, Coonoor 643 104, Rep by its Authorized Signatory, Mr.Benjamin Thangaraj

¶9

... Petitioner

¶10

Vs.

¶11

The Deputy Tax Officer – 2 (ST), Coonoor Assessment Circle, Uthagamandalam, Tamil Nadu.

¶12

... Respondent

¶13

Prayer:

¶14

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the respondent in the demand order passed in GSTIN 33AABCT0995K1Z4/2018-19 dated 29.04.2024 and the consequential

¶15

1/7

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

W.P.No.7407 of 2025

¶18

DRC-07 order in Ref.No.ZD330424242908A dated 29.04.2024 and quash the same and further direct the respondent to reassess the above orders.

¶19

For Petitioner : Ms.Dhana Madhri for M/s.Agam Legal

¶20

For Respondent : Ms.Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran, Government Advocate

¶21

ORDER

¶22

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order

¶23

dated 29.04.2024 passed by the respondent.

¶24

Ms.Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran, learned Government

¶25

Advocate, takes notice on behalf of the respondent. By consent of the parties, the main writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶26

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that a ll notices/communications were uploaded by the respondent in the GST

¶27

2/7

¶28

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶29

W.P.No.7407 of 2025

¶30

portal. Since the petitioner's employee, who was entrusted for filing

¶31

portal. Since the petitioner's employee, who was entrusted for filing returns, had left the employment, the petitioner was not aware of the said notices, due to which, they failed to file their reply within time. Under these circumstances, the impugned order came to be passed by the respondent without providing any opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. Hence, this petition has been filed.

¶32

4. Further, she would submit that the petitioner is willing to pay 25% of the disputed tax amount to the respondent. Hence, she requests this Court to grant an opportunity to the petitioner to present their case before the respondent by setting aside the impugned order.

¶33

5. On the other hand, the learned Government Advocate

¶34

appearing for the respondent would submit that the respondent had uploaded the notices in the GST Online Portal. But the petitioner failed to avail the said opportunity. Further, she has fairly admitted that no opportunity of personal hearing was provided to the petitioner prior to the passing of impugned order. Therefore, she requested this Court to

¶35

3/7

¶36

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶37

W.P.No.7407 of 2025

¶38

remit the matter back to the respondent, subject to the payment of 25% of the disputed tax amount by the petitioner.

¶39

6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

¶40

Government Advocate for the respondent and also perused the materials available on record.

¶41

In the cases on hand, it is clear that no opportunity of personal

¶42

hearing was provided to the petitioner prior to the passing of impugned order. Hence, this Court is of the view that the impugned order was passed in violation of principles of natural justice since it is just and necessary to provide an opportunity to the petitioner to establish their case on merits.

¶43

Further, it was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is willing to pay 25% of the disputed tax amount to the respondent. In such view of the matter, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order dated 29.04.2024 passed by the

¶44

4/7

¶45

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶46

W.P.No.7407 of 2025

¶47

respondent. Accordingly, this Court passes the following order:-

¶48

(i) The impugned order dated 29.04.2024 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the 1 st respondent for fresh consideration on condition that the petitioner shall pay 25% of disputed tax amount to the respondents within a period of four weeks from today (10.03.2025) and the setting aside of the impugned order will take effect from the date of payment of the said amount.

¶49

(ii) The petitioner shall file their reply/objection along with the required documents, if any, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶50

(iii) On filing of such reply/objection by the petitioner, the respondent shall consider the same and issue a 14 days clear notice, by fixing the date of personal hearing, to the petitioner and thereafter, pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, after hearing the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible.

¶51

5/7

¶52

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶53

W.P.No.7407 of 2025

¶54

9. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed.

¶55

10.03.2025

¶56

Speaking/Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No nsa