Sudeep Industrial Power System Vs Deputy Tax commissioner (Appeal)

¶1

WP No. 5250 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 19-02-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C. SARAVANAN

¶6

WP No. 5250 of 2026 and WMP Nos. 5774 to 5776 of 2026

¶7

Sudeep Industrial Power System Represented by its Proprietor, Ms. Keerthika Sangara Raj, GSTIN- 33DXSPK5216E1ZG No. 49, Sri Ragavendhar Nagar, 3rd Street, Veppampattu, Chennai- 602 024.

¶8

..Petitioner(s)

¶9

Vs

¶10

Deputy Tax Commissioner (Appeal) GST-Appeal, Chennai-I, Commercial Tax offices, Annex building, Chennai-6.

¶11

The Assistant Commissioner [ST] Thirumazhisai GST Integrated Building Nazarethpet, Chennai-123.

¶12

The Manager, The State Bank of India GNT Road, Padiyanallur, Chennai Tamil Nadu – 600 052.

¶13

..Respondent(s)

¶14

Prayer : This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, calling for the records on the file of the 2^nd Respondent in the demand order passed in GSTIN- 33DXSPK5216E1ZG/2021-22 dated 13.05.2025 and quash the same, and consequentially defreeze the petitioner’s bank account in A/c. No. 32776244073 by the 2^nd & 3^rd Respondents, and further direct the 2^nd respondent to reassess the above orders.

¶15

__________ Page1 of 4

¶16

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

WP No. 5250 of 2026

For Petitioner(s):

Ms.Devi Rudra M.

For Respondent(s): Mr.TNC.Kauship, AGP (R1 & R2)

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

The petitioner is before this Court against the impugned order dated 13.05.2025 in Form GST DRC-01 passed for the tax period 2021-2022, which was preceded by a Show Cause Notice in DRC 01 dated 04.05.2024. By the impugned order, the demand proposed in the aforesaid Show Cause Notice in

¶23

DRC 01 has been confirmed against the petitioner for the tax period 2021-2022.

¶24

Relevant portion of the impugned order is reproduced below:

¶25

“

¶26

*Period*	*TAX*		*Interes*	t		*Penalty*
_IGST _	_CGST _	*SGST IGST*	_CGST _	_SGST _	*IGST*	*CGST SGST*
2021-22 0	198844	198844 0	_84724 _	_84727 _	_19884 _	19884 19884

¶27

”

¶28

The challenge to the impugned order is primarily on the ground that on

¶29

the very same day, the second respondent /the Assistant Commissioner [ST], Thirumazhisai has passed yet another assessment order on the same issue for the same period, viz., 2021-2022, dropping the proposal in the Show Cause Notice in DRC 01 dated 09.10.2023.

¶30

The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the first and

¶31

second respondents confirm the same.

¶32

Page2 of 4

¶33

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

¶34

WP No. 5250 of 2026

¶35

Facts on record reveal that the proposal in the Show Cause Notice in DRC 01 dated 04.05.2024, which has culminated in the impugned order dated 13.05.2025, is for the same amount/demand, which has been dropped by the

¶36

other assessment order dated 13.05.2025 passed pursuant to the Show Cause Notice in DRC – 01 dated 09.10.2023 by the second respondent.

¶37

Considering the same, the impugned order passed by the 2^nd respondent/ Assistant Commissioner [ST], Thirumazhisai, is set aside and the case is remitted back to the second respondent to pass a fresh orders on merits in lieu of the other assessment order dated 13.05.2025, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶38