Apollo Medicals Vs The State Tax Officer Fac — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

Apollo Medicals Vs The State Tax Officer Fac — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of with no costs: impugned assessment order dated 16.05.2023 set aside and quashed and treated as a show cause notice; petitioner to file reply within 30 days; respondent to pass fresh order on merits preferably within three months after hearing; undertaking of counsel to remit 10% of disputed amount within 4 weeks recorded; on such payment, attachment on petitioner's bank account to stand lifted; failing compliance, respondent free to proceed as if the writ petition were dismissed in limine for laches.

Issue for consideration

Whether the assessment order dated 16.05.2023 passed under section 73 of the TNGST Act 2017 demanding Rs.3,50,850/- plus interest and penalty is liable to be quashed as cryptic, barred by limitation, non-speaking, illegal, arbitrary and without jurisdiction, and whether a fresh assessment should be directed after affording an opportunity of personal hearing.

Court's answer

The Court agreed with the views expressed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Allahabad in M/s.Katyal Industries Vs. State of UP and others and held that the decision could be applied to the facts of the case.

Ratio / Principle

The impugned assessment order dated 16.05.2023 is set aside and quashed; it shall be treated as a show cause notice; the petitioner shall file a reply within 30 days of receipt of a copy of the order; and the respondent is entitled to pass a fresh order on merits, as expeditiously as possible preferably within three months thereafter, after hearing the petitioner.

Key takeaways

In case the petitioner fails to comply with the stipulations, the respondent shall be at liberty to proceed against the petitioner as if the writ petition had been dismissed in limine on the ground of laches.ratio¶31
On payment of 10% of the disputed tax amount as undertaken by the petitioner's counsel, the attachment made on the writ petitioner's bank account shall stand lifted.ratio¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Madurai Bench), single judge (G.R.Swaminathan, J.) — Writ petition under Article 226 seeking certiorarified mandamus against an assessment order dated 16.05.2023 passed under section 73 of the TNGST Act 2017 demanding Rs.3,50,850/- plus interest and penalty. The order had been uploaded on the web portal, but the petitioner's GST registration stood cancelled as early as 29.04.2022, leaving it no occasion to access the portal. Counsel for the petitioner undertook to remit 10% of the disputed amount within four weeks, and relied on two Allahabad High Court decisions (M/s.Ahs Steels and M/s.Katyal Industries). Agreeing with the Division Bench view in M/s.Katyal Industries Vs. State of UP and applying it to the facts, the Court set aside and quashed the impugned order, directed that it be treated as a show cause notice, granted the petitioner 30 days to file a reply, and permitted the respondent to pass a fresh order on merits, preferably within three months, after hearing the petitioner. On payment of the 10% of the disputed tax amount as undertaken, the attachment on the petitioner's bank account was directed to stand lifted; on failure to comply, the respondent was left free to proceed as if the writ petition had been dismissed in limine on the ground of laches. Disposed of with no costs.

W.P(MD)No.25073 of 2025

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 12.09.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

W.P(MD)No.25073 of 2025

Tvl.APOLLO MEDICALS, Represented by its Proprietrix Jenitha Rani, GSTIN 33ANEP J2166R1ZO, No.11/88, C3, Main Road, Muthoot Bank Opposite, Kadaivilai Veedu, Manavalakurichy – 629 252.

... Petitioner

Vs.

The State Tax Officer (FAC), Thuckalay – 2 Nagercoil Assessment Circle, Commercial Taxes Building, Thuckalay. ... Respondent

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records on the file of the respondent in GSTIN 33ANEPJ2166R1ZO /2019-20 dated 16.05.2023 passed by the respondent under section 73 of TNGST Act 2017 and to quash the same as cryptic, barred by limitation, non-speaking, illegal, arbitrary, wholly

1/5

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

W.P(MD)No.25073 of 2025

without jurisdiction and direct the respondent to pass assessment order afresh after affording opportunity of personal hearing.

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Sudalai Muthu For Respondent : Mr.R.Suresh Kumar Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

Heard both sides.

2.The petitioner challenges the impugned assessment order dated 16.05.2023 whereby the petitioner has been called upon to pay the tax of Rs.3,50,850/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Fifty Thousand Eight Hundred and Fifty only) together with the interest and penalty. The said order was uploaded in the web portal. The petitioner's registration was cancelled as early as on 29.04.2022 itself. Therefore, the petitioner had no occasion to access the web portal.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner undertakes to remit 10% of the disputed amount within 4 weeks. The said undertaking is recorded. He also draws my attention to the decisions of

2/5

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

W.P(MD)No.25073 of 2025

the High Court of Allahabad in the case of M/s.Ahs Steels Vs the Commissioner of State Taxes and others and M/s.Katyal Industries Vs. State of UP and others .

4.I am in agreement with the views expressed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Allahabad in the case of M/s.Katyal Industries Vs. State of UP and others . Therefore, the decision can be applied to the facts of the case.

5.Considering the same, the impugned order is set aside. The petitioner shall file reply to the show cause notice within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The impugned order which has been quashed shall be treated as a show cause notice. The respondent is entitled to issue fresh order on merits as expeditiously as possible preferably within three months thereafter after hearing the petitioner.

6.It is also made clear that in case, the petitioner fails to comply with the above stipulations, the respondent shall be at liberty to proceed

3/5

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

W.P(MD)No.25073 of 2025

against the petitioner as the writ petition was dismissed in limine on the ground of laches. On payment of 10% of the disputed tax amount as undertaken, the attachment made on the writ petitioner's bank account shall stand lifted.

7.This Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.

12.09.2025

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No MGA

To

The State Tax Officer (FAC), Thuckalay – 2 Nagercoil Assessment Circle, Commercial Taxes Building, Thuckalay.

4/5

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

W.P(MD)No.25073 of 2025

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

MGA

W.P(MD)No.25073 of 2025

12.09.2025

5/5

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