Ps Textiles, (Represented by its Proprietor P Sukumar)… — GST and Indirect Tax | Madras HC (2026)

Ps Textiles, (Represented by its Proprietor P Sukumar)… — GST and Indirect Tax | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Impugned order dated 21.03.2024 set aside subject to verification and confirmation that about 82% of the tax demand was recovered; fresh order to be issued within three months from the date of such confirmation after providing a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits; bank attachment to stand raised subject to such confirmation; connected W.M.P.Nos.27861 & 27864 of 2026 closed; no order as to costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned order dated 21.03.2024 was passed without affording the petitioner a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits. +2 more

Court's answer

On perusal of the impugned order, it was evident that the order dated 21.03.2024 was issued without hearing the petitioner.

Ratio / Principle

Subject to verifying and confirming that about 82% of the tax demand was recovered pursuant to the impugned order, the impugned order is set aside so as to provide the petitioner an opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits.

Key takeaways

After providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, a fresh order shall be issued within three months from the date of verifying and confirming the recovery; subject to such confirmation, the bank attachment shall stand raised.ratio¶32
The Court observed that the writ petition was filed after the period of limitation had expired; no dismissal flowed from this observation.obiter¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy J.) disposed of a writ petition under Article 226 challenging an order dated 21.03.2024 bearing Reference No. ZD330324137545K passed by the Deputy State Tax Officer I, Kumarapalayam Assessment Circle. Finding on perusal that the impugned order was issued without hearing the petitioner, and noting the petitioner's submission that about 82% of the tax demand had been recovered, the Court set aside the impugned order subject to verification and confirmation of that recovery, directed issuance of a fresh order within three months of such confirmation after providing a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits, and ordered that the bank attachment stand raised subject to such confirmation. The Court observed that the writ petition was filed after the expiry of the period of limitation. Connected W.M.P.Nos.27861 & 27864 of 2026 were closed; no order as to costs. The prayer had sought fresh consideration for availing waiver under the Amnesty Scheme introduced under Section 128A of the CGST/TNGST Acts.

WP No. 25538 of 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 15-07-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

WP No. 25538 of 2026 and W.M.P.Nos.27861 & 27864 of 2026

PS Textiles, (Represented by its Proprietor P Sukumar) 15 A1, Kothukaran Kadu,Komarapalayam, Namakkal - 638183.

..Petitioner(s)

Vs

Deputy State Tax Officer I, Kumarapalayam Assessment Circle, 1st floor, tiruchengode road, RDO Office complex, sankari - 637301.

..Respondent(s)

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, To calling for the records relating to the impugned order bearing Reference No. ZD330324137545K dated 21.03.2024, passed by the Respondent and quash the same as the same being arbitrary, passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and also in violation of Articles 14, 19 (1) (g) and 265 of the Constitution and consequently direct the Respondent to reconsider the case of the Petitioner afresh for the purpose of availing the benefit of waiver under the Amnesty Scheme introduced under Section 128A of the CGST/TNGST Acts.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.Anish G K

Page1 of 4

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

WP No. 25538 of 2026

For Respondent(s): Ms.G.Dhana Madhri, Government Counsel (Tax) ********

ORDER

An order dated 21.03.2024 is assailed on the ground that the petitioner

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

Ms.G.Dhana Madhri, learned Government Counsel (Tax), accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.

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

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

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that about 82% of the tax demand under the impugned order was recovered. This aspect is required to be verified and confirmed.

Subject to verifying and confirming that about 82% of the tax demand

was recovered pursuant to the impugned order, the impugned order is set aside

so as to provide an opportunity to the petitioner to contest the tax demand on

Page2 of 4

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

WP No. 25538 of 2026

merits. After providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, a fresh order shall be issued within three months from the date of verifying and confirming the above mentioned recovery. Subject to such confirmation, the bank attachment shall stand raised.

The writ petition is disposed of on the above terms. Consequently, connected writ miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

15-07-2026

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No RNA

To

Deputy State Tax Officer I, Kumarapalayam Assessment Circle, 1st floor, tiruchengode road, RDO Office complex, sankari - 637301.

__________ Page3 of 4

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

WP No. 25538 of 2026

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.

RNA

WP No. 25538 of 2026 and W.M.P.Nos.27861 & 27864 of 2026

15-07-2026

__________ Page4 of 4

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