Tvl.M.S.P Supplier and Construction Vs State Tax Officer (St)

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the entire records relating to the impugned order in Reference No.ZD3308240507848 dated 07.08.2024 passed by the respondent along with annexures and quash the same.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Ramesh

¶13

For Respondent : Mr.C.Harsharaj Special Government Pleader

¶14

1/6

¶15

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

¶16

W.P.No.4580 of 2026

¶17

ORDER

¶18

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

¶19

for the Respondent.

¶20

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

¶21

In this Writ Petition, the Petitioner has challenged the impugned Order dated 07.08.2024, which was preceded by a Show Cause Notice in GST DRC-01 dated 24.05.2024 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 07.08.2024.

¶22

The Petitioner was also issued with Reminder on 27.06.2024, 07.07.2024 and 11.07.2024 which called upon the Petitioner to file a reply

¶23

and to appear for a personal hearing. However, the Petitioner neither filed any reply nor appeared for the personal hearing despite multiple opportunities. Thus, the impugned Order has been passed.

¶24

2/6

¶25

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

¶26

W.P.No.4580 of 2026

¶27

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

¶28

107 of the respective GST enactments, 2017 against the impugned Order has already expired. The present Writ Petition has been filed only on 06.02.2026.

¶29

At this stage, the learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is willing to pre-deposit 50% of the disputed tax as a condition for denovo adjudication.

¶30

Under similar circumstances, Orders have been quashed and

¶31

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.

¶32

Therefore, to balance the interest of both parties viz., the Assessee and the Revenue, the case is remitted back to the Respondent to pass a fresh order on merits subject to the Petitioner depositing 50% 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.

¶33

3/6

¶34

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

¶35

W.P.No.4580 of 2026

¶36

Within such time, the Petitioner shall also file a reply to the

¶37

Show Cause Notice in GST DRC-01 dated 24.05.2024 together with requisite documents to substantiate the case by treating the impugned Order dated 07.08.2024 as an addendum to the Show Cause Notice dated 24.05.2024.

¶38

In case the Petitioner complies with the above stipulations, the 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 the above stipulations, the attachment of the bank account of the Petitioner shall also stand automatically vacated.

¶39

It is made clear that bank attachment shall be lifted subject to the

¶40

Petitioner depositing 50% 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.

¶41