Chanduloki Traders Vs The Deputy State Tax Officer 1 — GST and Indirect Tax | Madras HC (2026)

Chanduloki Traders Vs The Deputy State Tax Officer 1 — GST and Indirect Tax | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of at admission (with consent of counsel) on terms: case remitted to the Respondent for a fresh/final order on merits subject to the Petitioner pre-depositing the entire disputed tax within 30 days and filing a reply to the assessment order dated 08.11.2023 (impugned order treated as addendum); bank attachment vacated/lifted on compliance; recovery permitted on default; no costs; connected W.M.P.Nos.6315 and 6316 of 2026 closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned order dated 29.12.2024 in Form GST DRC-08 (Order Reference No.ZD331224257224Q, GSTIN/33BREPS0770F1ZX/2019-20) for tax period 2019-2020 should be quashed by writ of certiorari. +1 more

Court's answer

Following its settled practice under similar circumstances (quashing orders and remitting back on terms with 25% to 100% deposit of disputed tax depending on length of delay, with which the Court found no reason to differ), the case is remitted back to the Respondent to pass a fresh order on merits subject to the Petitioner depositing the entire disputed tax, to balance the interests of the Assessee and the Revenue.

Ratio / Principle

The Petitioner shall deposit the entire disputed tax in cash or from the Petitioner's Electronic Cash Register within thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

Key takeaways

Within the deposit period the Petitioner shall also file a reply to the assessment order dated 08.11.2023 with requisite supporting documents, treating the impugned order dated 29.12.2024 as an addendum to that assessment order.ratio¶38
On compliance with the stipulations, 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.ratio¶39

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (C.Saravanan, J.), W.P.No.5798 of 2026 (with W.M.P.Nos.6315 and 6316 of 2026), disposed of at admission on 17.02.2026: Certiorari challenge under Article 226 to the impugned order dated 29.12.2024 in Form GST DRC-08 (Order Reference No.ZD331224257224Q, GSTIN/33BREPS0770F1ZX/2019-20) for tax period 2019-2020; Section 107 appeal limitation had expired and the petition was filed only on 02.02.2026. On the petitioner's endorsement offering payment for denovo adjudication of the entire tax liability, and following its practice of quashing and remitting similar matters on deposit of 25% to 100% of disputed tax depending on delay, the Court remitted the case to the Respondent for a fresh order on merits subject to deposit of the entire disputed tax in cash or from the Electronic Cash Register within 30 days and a reply to the assessment order dated 08.11.2023, treating the impugned order as an addendum; final order preferably within 3 months after due notice; bank attachment stands automatically vacated on compliance and lifted subject to full deposit and no arrears for other tax periods; on default, recovery may proceed as if the writ were dismissed in limine. No costs; connected WMPs closed.

W.P.No.5798 of 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 17.02.2026

CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

W.P.No.5798 of 2026

and W.M.P.Nos.6315 and 6316 of 2026

Chanduloki Traders Represented by its Proprietor Raman Sampath.

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Deputy State Tax Officer – 1, (also known as the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer) Krishnagiri – 11 Hosur, Tamil Nadu.

... Respondent

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records on the files of the learned Respondent herein in GSTIN/33BREPS0770F1ZX/2019-20 in Form GST DRC – 08 in Order Reference No.ZD331224257224Q dated 29.12.2024 and quash the same.

For Petitioner : M/s.K.Siri Chandana

For Respondent : Mrs.K.Vasanthamala Government Advocate

1/6

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

W.P.No.5798 of 2026

ORDER

Mrs.K.Vasanthamala, learned Government Advocate takes notice for the Respondent.

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 Government Advocate for the Respondent.

In this Writ Petition, the Petitioner has challenged the impugned Order dated 29.12.2024 passed for the tax period 2019-2020, wherein, assessment order dated 08.11.2023 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 29.12.2024.

It is noticed that the limitation for filing an appeal under Section 107 of the respective GST enactments, 2017 against the impugned Order has already expired. The present Writ Petition has been filed only on 02.02.2026.

2/6

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

W.P.No.5798 of 2026

At this stage, the learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that

the Petitioner is willing to pre-deposit the entire disputed tax as a condition for denovo adjudication.

The learned counsel for the Petitioner has also made an

following endorsement to that effect in the Court bundle which has been extracted hereunder:-

“The Petitioner is ready and willing to pay the terms as imposed by this Hon’ble Court for denovo adjudication of the entire tax liability and undertake to pay.”

Under similar circumstances, Orders have been quashed and 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.

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 the entire

3/6

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

W.P.No.5798 of 2026

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.

Within such time, the Petitioner shall also file a reply to the assessment order dated 08.11.2023 together with requisite documents to substantiate the case by treating the impugned Order dated 29.12.2024 as an addendum to the assessment order dated 08.11.2023.

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 if any, shall also stand automatically vacated.

It is made clear that bank attachment shall be lifted subject to the Petitioner depositing the entire 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.

4/6

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

W.P.No.5798 of 2026

In case 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 this Writ Petition was dismissed in limine today.

Needless to state, before passing any such order, the Respondent

shall give due notice to the Petitioner.

This Writ Petition stands disposed of with the above observations. No costs. Connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

17.02.2026

Neutral Citation: Yes / No jas

To:

The Deputy State Tax Officer – 1, (also known as the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer) Krishnagiri – 11 Hosur, Tamil Nadu.

5/6

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

W.P.No.5798 of 2026

C.SARAVANAN, J.

jas

W.P.No.5798 of 2026

and W.M.P.Nos.6315 and 6316 of 2026

17.02.2026

6/6

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