Uthirapathi Contractor Vs The State Tax Officer… — GST and Indirect Tax | Madras HC (2025)

Uthirapathi Contractor Vs The State Tax Officer… — GST and Indirect Tax | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Impugned GST assessment order dated 05.09.2024 set aside; petitioner to submit reply within two weeks; respondent to provide opportunity of hearing and pass orders afresh on merits and in accordance with law; bank attachment, if any, raised; no order as to costs; connected miscellaneous petition (W.M.P.(MD) No.235 of 2025) closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned GST assessment order dated 05.09.2024 (Tax Period 2021-22, GSTIN 33AAGPU8293D2ZE), issued after the notice was made available only on the portal without an opportunity of personal hearing, is illegal and passed in gross violation of the Principles of Natural Justice, warranting quashing of the order and a direction to re-do the assessment afresh after providing the petitioner an opportunity of Personal Hearing under the GST Act, 2017.

Ratio / Principle

This Court held that the issue raised in the writ petition is covered by its earlier batch order in W.P.(MD) No.26481 of 2024 dated 06.01.2025, notwithstanding the submission that tax had been paid pursuant to the DRC-01 notice and only interest and penalty were being pursued, because the notice had been made available only on the portal.

Key takeaways

The impugned assessment order is set aside.ratio¶29
The petitioner is directed to submit his reply within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.ratio¶29
Thereafter, the respondent shall give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) - K.Kumaresh Babu, J. - W.P.(MD) No.342 of 2025 (07.01.2025): GST assessment order dated 05.09.2024 for Tax Period 2021-22 (GSTIN 33AAGPU8293D2ZE) issued by the State Tax Officer (Inspection-I), Thiruvarur, set aside under Article 226 because the notice content had been made available only on the portal without an opportunity of Personal Hearing, engaging the Principles of Natural Justice under the GST Act, 2017. Following its earlier batch order in W.P.(MD) No.26481 of 2024 dated 06.01.2025, the Court allowed the writ petition, directed the petitioner to file a reply within two weeks and the respondent to hear the petitioner and pass fresh orders on merits, raised any bank attachment, and closed the connected W.M.P.(MD) No.235 of 2025 with no order as to costs.

W.P.(MD) No.342 of 2025

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 07.01.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU

W.P.(MD) No.342 of 2025

and

W.M.P.(MD) No.235 of 2025

Tvl.Uthirapathi Contractor, Rep., by its Proprietor P.Uthirapathi, No.3/566, West Street, Sakkottai, Sivapuram, Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District-612 401.

.. Petitioner

Vs.

The State Tax Officer (Inspection-I), Office of the Joint Commissioner, (State tax) (Intelligence), Thiruvarur Division, Thiruvarur.

.. Respondent

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the Respondent vide his proceedings in GSTIN: 33AAGPU8293D2ZE Tax Period: 2021-22 dated 05.09.2024 and quash the same as it is illegal and passed in gross violation of Principles of Natural Justice and further direct the Respondent to re-do the assessment afresh after providing the petitioner

_________Page 1 of 4

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

W.P.(MD) No.342 of 2025

an opportunity of Personal Hearing as per the provisions of the GST Act, 2017.

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Satheesh Murugan For Respondent : Mr.R.Suresh Kumar Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

The learned Additional Government Pleader would submit that the petitioner had paid the tax amount pursuant to the DRC-01 notice and the present show cause notice has only been issued for collection of interest and penalty.

Heard Mr.A.Satheesh Murugan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.R.Suresh Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondent.

Even though the learned Additional Government Pleader would

submit that the petitioner had paid the tax amount pursuant to the DRC-01 notice and the present show cause notice has only been issued for collection of interest and penalty, however, considering the fact that

_________Page 2 of 4

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

W.P.(MD) No.342 of 2025

the same has been only made available in the portal, this Court is of the view that the issue raised in this writ petition is covered by an order of this Court in W.P.(MD) No.26481 of 2024 etc., batch dated 06.01.2025.

In view of the above, the impugned assessment order is set aside. The petitioner is directed to submit his reply within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and thereafter, the respondent, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, pass orders on merits and in accordance with law. In view of this order, the bank attachment, if any, made shall also stand raised.

With the aforesaid direction, this Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

07.01.2025

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No abr

_________Page 3 of 4

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

W.P.(MD) No.342 of 2025

K.KUMARESH BABU, J.

abr

To

The State Tax Officer (Inspection-I), Office of the Joint Commissioner, (State tax) (Intelligence), Thiruvarur Division, Thiruvarur.

W.P.(MD) No.342 of 2025

Dated: 07.01.2025

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

_________Page 4 of 4