Nivetha Printers Vs State Tax Officer — GST and Indirect Tax | Madras HC (2026)

Nivetha Printers Vs State Tax Officer — GST and Indirect Tax | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of at admission with consent: case remitted to the first respondent for a fresh order on merits, conditional on the petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax (cash or Electronic Cash Register) within 30 days and filing a reply to the SCN dated 24.11.2024 (impugned order treated as its addendum); amounts already recovered adjustable towards the pre-deposit; final order preferably within 3 months; bank account attachment to stand vacated on compliance and absent arrears for other tax periods; on default, recovery as if the writ were dismissed in limine, with due notice before any fresh order. Connected W.M.Ps. closed; no costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned GST DRC-07 order dated 22.01.2025, passed after the petitioner failed to respond to the Show Cause Notice and reminders, should be quashed and the matter remitted for a fresh order, notwithstanding that the Section 107 appeal limitation had expired. +1 more

Court's answer

Following the court's course in similar circumstances — where orders have been quashed and cases remitted for fresh orders subject to the assessee depositing 25% to 100% of the disputed tax depending on the length of delay in approaching the court — the court found no reason to take a different view in this case.

Ratio / Principle

To balance the interests of the assessee and the Revenue, the case is remitted to the first respondent to pass a fresh order on merits, subject to the petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax in cash or from the petitioner's Electronic Cash Register within thirty days of receipt of the order.

Key takeaways

Any amount already recovered from the petitioner shall be adjusted towards the 25% pre-deposit, subject to verification by the first respondent.ratio¶10
Within the thirty-day period the petitioner shall also file a reply to the Show Cause Notice in GST DRC-01 dated 24.11.2024 together with requisite documents to substantiate the case.ratio¶11
The impugned order dated 22.01.2025 is to be treated as an addendum to the Show Cause Notice dated 24.11.2024.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (C. Saravanan, J., 09.01.2026) disposed of, at admission and with consent, a writ of certiorari under Article 226 filed by M/s. Nivetha Printers, Tiruppur against a Form GST DRC-07 demand order (Ref No.ZD330125173762I dt. 22.01.2025) with accompanying detailed order passed by the State Tax Officer, Kongu Nagar Circle, after the petitioner failed to respond to a GST DRC-01 show cause notice dt. 24.11.2024 and reminders dt. 31.12.2024, 06.01.2025 and 11.01.2025; the Section 107 appeal window under the respective GST enactments, 2017 had closed before the 05.01.2026 filing. Adopting its practice in like matters of quashing orders and remitting cases with a delay-graded pre-deposit of 25% to 100% of the disputed tax, the court remitted the case to the State Tax Officer for a fresh order on merits, conditional on: (i) deposit of 25% of the disputed tax in cash or from the Electronic Cash Register within 30 days, amounts already recovered counting towards it subject to verification; (ii) a reply to the DRC-01 SCN with supporting documents, the impugned order being treated as its addendum; and (iii) a fresh final order preferably within 3 months. On compliance, the attachment over the petitioner's Karur Vysya Bank account stands automatically vacated, provided there are no arrears for other tax periods; on default, the Revenue may recover as if the writ were dismissed in limine, due notice preceding any fresh order. W.M.P.Nos.91, 93 and 94 of 2026 closed; no costs.

W.P.No.114 of 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 09.01.2026

CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

W.P.No.114 of 2026

and

W.M.P.Nos.91, 93 and 94 of 2026

M/s. Nivetha Printers, (Represented by its Proprietor Mr.Ramaiah Jayakumar) No.2-1, Kumarasamy Compound, 7^th Street, Golden Nagar Main Road, Mannari Post, Tiruppur – 641 607.

... Petitioner

Vs.

State Tax Officer,

Kongu Nagar Circle, Tiruppur.

Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC) Kongu Nagar Circle, No.16 Indra Nagar 1^st Street, Avinashi – 641 603.

The Branch Manager, Karur Vysya Bank, P.B.No.6-315 1^st floor,

Kumaran Road, Tiruppur – 641 601.

... Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records in the impugned order passed by the first respondent in Form GST DRC 07 vide order Ref No.ZD330125173762I dated 22.01.2025 along with its accompanying detailed order and quash the same.

1/6

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

W.P.No.114 of 2026

For Petitioner : Mr.K.G.Jayasuriya For Respondents : Mr.C.Harsharaj Special Government Pleader

ORDER

Mr.C.Harsharaj, learned Special Government Pleader, takes notice

for the Respondents.

This Writ Petition is being disposed of at the time of admission with the consent of the learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned Special Government Pleader for the Respondents.

In this Writ Petition, the Petitioner has challenged the impugned Order dated 22.01.2025, which was preceded by a Show Cause Notice in GST DRC-01 dated 24.11.2024 wherein the Petitioner was called upon to appear for personal hearing. However, the Petitioner had not taken advantage of the same and thus, suffered the impugned Order dated 22.01.2025.

The Petitioner was also issued with Reminder on 31.12.2024, 06.01.2025 and 11.01.2025 which called upon the Petitioner to file a reply

and to appear for a personal hearing. However, the Petitioner neither filed

2/6

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

W.P.No.114 of 2026

any reply nor appeared for the personal hearing despite multiple opportunities. Thus, the impugned Order has been passed.

It is noticed that the limitation for filing an appeal under Section

107 of the respective GST enactments, 2017 against the impugned Order has already expired. The present Writ Petition has been filed only on 05.01.2026.

At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a

portion of the disputed tax demand has already been recovered from the Petitioner's Electronic Cash Register.

On the other hand, the learned Government Advocate for the respondent submits that they are unable to confirm the same.

Under similar circumstances, Orders have been quashed and

cases have been remitted back to the Respondent to pass a fresh order on terms subject to such Assessee depositing 25% to 100% of the disputed tax depending upon the length of delay in approaching the Court. I do not find

any reason to take a different view in this case.

3/6

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

W.P.No.114 of 2026

Therefore, to balance the interest of both parties viz., the Assessee and the Revenue, the case is remitted back to the 1^st Respondent to pass a fresh order on merits subject to the Petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax in cash or from the Petitioner's Electronic Cash Register within a

period of thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Needless to state, any amount already recovered from the petitioner shall be adjusted towards the 25% pre-deposit, subject to verification by the 1^st Respondent.

Within such time, the Petitioner shall also file a reply to the Show Cause Notice in GST DRC-01 dated 24.11.2024 together with requisite documents to substantiate the case by treating the impugned Order dated 22.01.2025 as an addendum to the Show Cause Notice dated 24.11.2024.

In case the Petitioner complies with the above stipulations, the 1^st 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 (3) months of such reply/pre-deposit. Subject to the Petitioner complying with

4/6

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

W.P.No.114 of 2026

the above stipulations, the attachment of the bank account of the Petitioner shall also stand automatically vacated.

It is made clear that bank attachment shall be lifted subject to the Petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax as ordered above and the Petitioner not being in arrears of any other amount for any other tax period barring the amount demanded under the impugned Order.

In case the Petitioner fails to comply with any of the stipulations, the 1^st 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.

Needless to state, before passing any such order, the 1^st Respondent shall give due notice to the Petitioner.

This Writ Petition stands disposed of with the above observations. No costs. Connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

09.01.2026

Neutral Citation: Yes / No av

5/6

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

W.P.No.114 of 2026

C.SARAVANAN, J.

av

To:

State Tax Officer, Kongu Nagar Circle, Tiruppur.

Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC) Kongu Nagar Circle, No.16 Indra Nagar 1^st Street, Avinashi – 641 603.

The Branch Manager, Karur Vysya Bank, P.B.No.6-315 1^st floor, Kumaran Road, Tiruppur – 641 601.

W.P.No.114 of 2026

and W.M.P.Nos.91, 93 and 94 of 2026

09.01.2026

6/6

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