Disposed¶30

Rojamani Industries v. The Assistant Commissioner (St)

Madras HC7 Jul 2026WP/24380/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

GST assessment under Section 73 CGST/TNGST Act 2017; denial of hearing / breach of natural justice; Certiorari under Article 226; Assessment Order 29.08.2025 Ref. ZD330825350733A; Form GST DRC-07; 25% pre-deposit of disputed tax demand as remand condition; remand for fresh order within three months; writ filed after limitation expired; Velakovil Assessment Circle; Rojamani Industries, Kangayam, Tiruppur; disposed with no costs.

What did the court decide?

Impugned assessment order dated 29.08.2025 (Ref. No.ZD330825350733A) and consequential Form GST DRC-07 set aside subject to remittance of 25% of the disputed tax demand within thirty days; matter remanded to the respondent for re-consideration, with a fresh order to be issued within three months of remittance after providing the petitioner a reasonable opportunity. ¶30

Rojamani Industries Vs The Assistant Commissioner (St) — GST and Indirect Tax | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶30

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner had a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits before the impugned assessment order dated 29.08.2025 was issued.

¶21

Court's answer

On perusal of the impugned order, the Court found it evident that the order was issued without hearing the petitioner.

¶25

Ratio / Principle

Subject to the petitioner remitting 25% of the disputed tax demand within thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded for re-consideration.

¶30

Key takeaways

The Court noted that the writ petition was filed after the period of limitation had expired.obiter¶25
After providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, a fresh order shall be issued within three months from the date of remittance of 25% of the disputed tax demand.ratio¶34
The writ petition is disposed of on the above terms; consequently, the connected writ miscellaneous petitions are closed, with no order as to costs.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, J.) - Rojamani Industries v. The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Velakovil Assessment Circle (WP No. 24380 of 2026): Assessment Order dated 29.08.2025 passed under Section 73 of the CGST/TNGST Act, 2017 (Reference No.ZD330825350733A) for GSTIN 33BTSPB6138G1ZO/ 2018-19, with consequential Form GST DRC-07, was challenged as having been issued without hearing the petitioner; the Court observed that the writ petition was filed after the period of limitation expired. Subject to the petitioner remitting 25% of the disputed tax demand within thirty days of receipt of a copy of the order, the impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for re-consideration, with a fresh order to be issued within three months of remittance after providing a reasonable opportunity. Writ petition disposed of accordingly; connected W.M.P.Nos.26560 & 26562 of 2026 closed; no costs.

¶1

WP No. 24380 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 07-07-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

¶6

WP No. 24380 of 2026 and W.M.P.Nos.26560 & 26562 of 2026

¶7

Rojamani Industries Rep. by its Proprietor Mr.P.Boopathi, No. 2/97, Kavalakattuvalasu, Kangayam, Tiruppur District, Tamil Nadu 638108

¶8

..Petitioner(s)

¶9

¶10

The Assistant Commissioner (ST) Velakovil Assessment Circle.

¶11

..Respondent(s)

¶12

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating

¶13

to the impugned proceedings of the Respondent in GSTIN 33BTSPB6138G1ZO/ 2018-19, culminating in the Assessment Order dated 29.08.2025, passed under Section 73 of the CGST/TNGST Act, 2017, bearing Reference No.ZD330825350733A, along with the consequential Form GST DRC-07 dated 29.08.2025, and quash all the impugned proceedings as passed contrary to the provisions of the CGST/TNGST Act, 2017, and against the principles of natural justice.

¶14

For Petitioner(s): M/s.Samuel Rupesh Rajkumar

¶15

Page1 of 4

¶16

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

¶17

WP No. 24380 of 2026

¶18

For Respondent(s): Ms.Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran, Government Counsel (Tax)

¶19

¶20

ORDER

¶21

An order dated 29.08.2025 is assailed on the ground that the petitioner

¶22

did not have a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits.

¶23

Ms.Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran, learned Government Counsel (Tax), accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.

¶24

On perusal of the impugned order, it is evident that such order was

¶25

issued without hearing the petitioner. The writ petition has been filed after the period of limitation expired.

¶26

On instructions, learned counsel for the petitioner agrees to remit 25%

¶27

of the disputed tax demand as a condition for remand. An endorsement to that effect has been made on the bundle.

¶28

Subject to the condition that the petitioner remits 25% of the disputed

¶29

tax demand within thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order,

¶30

the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded for re-consideration.

¶31

Page2 of 4

¶32

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

¶33

WP No. 24380 of 2026

¶34

After providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, a fresh order shall be issued within three months from the date of remittance of 25% of the disputed tax demand.

¶35