K.Goutham, Vs Assistant Commissioner (St)(Fac) — GST and Indirect Tax | Madras HC (2026)

K.Goutham, Vs Assistant Commissioner (St)(Fac) — GST and Indirect Tax | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ Petition disposed of with directions and without costs; matter remitted to the Respondent for a fresh/final order on merits subject to pre-deposit of 25% of the disputed tax within thirty (30) days; bank account attachment (if any) to stand automatically vacated/lifted on compliance and absence of arrears for other tax periods; liberty to the Respondent to recover the tax as if the petition were dismissed in limine on non-compliance; due notice required before any fresh order; connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Impugned Order dated 26.08.2025 (Ref. No ZD330825312177G) and the Consequential Impugned Notice dated 27.01.2026 (RC. No. 33AGOPK2762R1ZQ/2021-22) issued by the Respondent are liable to be quashed by a writ of certiorari.

Court's answer

The case is remitted back to the 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 (30) days from receipt of a copy of the order.

Ratio / Principle

On compliance, the Respondent shall pass a final order on merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, preferably within three (3) months of such reply/pre-deposit.

Key takeaways

Subject to the Petitioner complying with the stipulations, any attachment of the Petitioner's bank account shall stand automatically vacated.ratio¶34
The bank attachment shall be lifted subject to the Petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax as ordered and the Petitioner not being in arrears of any other amount for any other tax period, barring the amount demanded under the impugned Order.ratio¶38
If the Petitioner fails to comply with any of the stipulations, the Respondent is at liberty to proceed against the Petitioner to recover the tax in accordance with law as if the Writ Petition was dismissed in limine.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Madras (C. Saravanan, J.), single-judge bench, disposed of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed on 18.03.2026 by K.Goutham challenging a GST order dated 26.08.2025 (Ref. No ZD330825312177G) of the Assistant Commissioner (ST)(FAC), Tirupur North-I Circle, and a consequential notice dated 27.01.2026 (RC. No. 33AGOPK2762R1ZQ/2021-22). The order followed a Show Cause Notice in GST DRC-01 dated 02.06.2025 and reminders of 22.07.2025 and 14.08.2025 to which the petitioner neither replied nor appeared; the limitation for appeal under Section 107 of the respective GST enactments, 2017 had expired. Acting on the petitioner's court-bundle endorsement offering to pay 25% of the disputed tax, the Court remitted the matter to the Respondent for a fresh order on merits conditional on deposit of 25% of the disputed tax in cash or from the Electronic Cash Register within thirty days, directed a final order preferably within three months of the reply/pre-deposit with due notice, ordered automatic vacatur and lifting of any bank account attachment upon compliance (subject to no arrears for other tax periods), and reserved liberty to recover the tax as if the petition were dismissed in limine on non-compliance. No costs; connected WMP Nos. 12503 and 12508 of 2026 closed.