Disposed

Kalpana v. The Deputy State Tax officer

Madras HC25 Feb 2026WP/7496/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging ex parte GST assessment orders after the appeal limitation expired. The petitioner undertook to deposit 50% of the disputed tax. The court quashed nothing outright but remitted the matter for fresh adjudication on that condition, with bank attachments to stand vacated upon compliance.

What did the court decide?

Matter remitted for de novo adjudication subject to deposit of 50% of disputed tax within 30 days; reply to SCN to be filed; bank attachments vacated on compliance.

Kalpana Vs The Deputy State Tax officer — GST and Indirect Tax | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

WP No. 7496 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 25-02-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C. SARAVANAN

¶6

WP No. 7496 of 2026 and W.M.P.Nos.8080, 8083, 8090, 8091 & 8095 of 2026

¶7

Kalpana

¶8

W/o.Kannan Partner,Tvl.Madras Commercials Agencies,No.53, Sembudoss Street, Chennai, Tamil Nadu - 60001.

¶9

..Petitioner(s)

¶10

¶11

The Deputy State Tax officer Broadway Assessment circle No.32, Integrated commercial Taxes office complex Room No.304, Elephant Gate Bridge Road (Walltax Road) Vepery,

¶12

Chennai-600 003

¶13

The Branch Manager ICICI Bank LTd 231 Jawaharlal Nehru Salai Koyambedu Chennai-600 107

¶14

The Branch Manager Tamilnad mercantile Bank Ltd 125/1, IT Highway, OMR Sholinganallur Chennai-600 119

¶15

The Branch Manager City Union Bank LTd Semmanjeri Branch 3, OMR Road, Semmanjeri Chennai-600 119

¶16

__________ Page1 of 6

¶17

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

¶18

WP No. 7496 of 2026

¶19

..Respondent(s)

¶20

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of certiorari call for the records on the files of the 1st respondent herein in order under section 73, the summary of the order in Form GST DRC-01 both issued in Reference No. ZD331023104007A dated 17.10.2023, issued in GSTN 33ABIFM6390C1ZC for the Assessment year 2019-20 and Consequential order passed by the 1st Respondent under section 74 the summary of the order in Form GST DRC 07 both issued in Reference No.ZD3307242403997 on 19.07.2024 in GSTN/Temp ID/UIN 33ABIFM6390CQZC and quash the same.

¶21

For Petitioner(s): Mr.Raji For Respondent(s): Mr.TNC Kaushik, Additional Government Pleader for R1 Mr.C.Mohan & Rexy Josephine Mary for M/s.King and Partridge for R2

¶22

ORDER

¶23

Heard Mr.Raji, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.NC Kaushik, the learned Additional Government Pleader for the first respondent and Mr.C.Mohan for the second respondent.

¶24

This Writ Petition is being disposed of at the stage of admission itself

¶25

with the consent of the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Government Advocate for the Respondent.

¶26

__________ Page2 of 6

¶27

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

¶28

WP No. 7496 of 2026

¶29

In this Writ Petition, the Petitioner has challenged the impugned Order dated 19.07.2024, which was preceded by a Show Cause Notice in GST DRC-01 dated 17.10.2023 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 19.07.2024.

¶30

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 23.02.2026.

¶31

The learned counsel for the petitioner concedes that the petitioner is willing to deposit 50% of the disputed tax confirmed vide impugned order as a condition to de novo adjudication subject to adjustment of the amount said to have been recovered from the petitioner.

¶32

The learned counsel for the petitioner has also made an endorsement to

¶33

that effect in the Court bundle, which is extracted hereunder:

¶34

“ The petitioner undertake to pay 50%”

¶35

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

¶36

Page3 of 6

¶37

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

¶38

WP No. 7496 of 2026

¶39

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.

¶40

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, after adjusting the amount said to have been recovered from the petitioner, if any, 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.

¶41

Within such time, the Petitioner shall also file a reply to the Show Cause Notice in GST DRC-01 dated 17.10.2023 together with requisite documents to substantiate the case by treating the impugned Order dated 19.07.2024 as an addendum to the Show Cause Notice dated 17.10.2023.

¶42

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.

¶43

__________ Page4 of 6

¶44

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

¶45

WP No. 7496 of 2026

¶46

It is made clear that bank attachment, if any, shall be lifted subject to the 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.

¶47

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.

¶48

Needless to state, before passing any such order, the Respondent shall give due notice to the Petitioner.

¶49

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

¶50

25-02-2026

¶51

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

¶52

BKN

¶53

__________ Page5 of 6

¶54

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

WP No. 7496 of 2026

C.SARAVANAN, J.

BKN

To:

The Deputy State Tax officer Broadway Assessment circle No.32, Integrated commercial Taxes office complex Room No.304, Elephant Gate Bridge Road (Walltax Road) Vepery, Chennai-600 003

¶60

The Branch Manager ICICI Bank LTd 231 Jawaharlal Nehru Salai Koyambedu Chennai-600 107

¶61

The Branch Manager Tamilnad mercantile Bank Ltd 125/1, IT Highway, OMR Sholinganallur Chennai-600 119

¶62

The Branch Manager City Union Bank LTd Semmanjeri Branch 3, OMR Road, Semmanjeri Chennai-600 119

¶63

WP No. 7496 of 2026

¶64

25-02-2026

¶65

__________ Page6 of 6

¶66

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

Kalpana v. The Deputy State Tax officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kalpana v. The Deputy State Tax officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s.ALFair Enterprises Vs the Assistant Commissioner (Circle)

Sri Lakshmi Prabha Hardwares Vs the State Tax Officer (St)

Ruthra Electricals and Hardwares Vs the State Tax Officer

M/s. Rakhee Fenestration LLP Vs Deputy Commissioner (St)

Cosmo Granites Pvt. Ltd. Vs Joint Commissioner

M/s.Viji Polymers Vs Assistant Commissioner(St)