M/s.Jasmine Trade Vs The Assistant Commissioner (St) — GST and Indirect Tax | Madras HC (2026)

M/s.Jasmine Trade Vs The Assistant Commissioner (St) — GST and Indirect Tax | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition ordered on terms: petitioner to pay 25% of the disputed tax within four weeks; upon such payment, the impugned order dated 19.11.2025 stands set aside and the matter is remitted to the respondent for fresh adjudication; petitioner to file reply and evidence; respondent to pass fresh orders in accordance with law expeditiously; no costs; connected miscellaneous petitions (W.M.P(MD)Nos.6869 and 6897 of 2026) closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned ex-parte order dated 19.11.2025 in Ref.No.ZD331125341306T passed under Section 73 of the CGST/TNGST Act for FY 2021-22 is liable to be quashed by writ of certiorari. +1 more

Court's answer

The impugned orders were passed ex-parte because the petitioner did not avail the opportunity when the show cause notice was uploaded.

Ratio / Principle

Taking into account the petitioner's submission that the order was uploaded only on the web portal, one more opportunity can be granted to the petitioner on condition of payment of 25% of the disputed tax amount.

Key takeaways

Upon payment of 25% of the disputed tax within four weeks, the impugned order dated 19.11.2025 shall stand set aside and the matter stands remitted back to the file of the respondent.ratio¶30
The petitioner shall appear before the respondent, file a reply and produce documentary evidence in support of its claim, and the respondent authority shall pass orders afresh in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible.ratio¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Constitution of India, Article 226 — Writ of Certiorari — GST — Assessment order dated 19.11.2025 in Ref.No.ZD331125341306T under Section 73 of the CGST/TNGST Act for FY 2021-22 passed ex-parte as the petitioner did not respond to the show cause notice uploaded on the portal — Petitioner's contention that the order was uploaded only on the web portal and it had no awareness to verify the portal accepted — Held, one more opportunity granted subject to payment of 25% of the disputed tax within four weeks — Upon such payment, the impugned order stands set aside and the matter remitted to the respondent — Petitioner to appear, file reply and produce documentary evidence — Respondent to pass fresh orders in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible — No costs; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

W.P(MD)No.8514 of 2026

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

Dated: 02.04.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

W.P(MD)No.8514 of 2026 and W.M.P(MD)Nos.6869 and 6897 of 2026

M/s.Jasmine Trade

Represented by its Proprietor Mr.Abubacker Mohamed Hameed Meeran GSTIN:33AWIPM7525J1ZA No.1/20F21/1, Koilpillai Nagar, Thermal Nagar, Thoothukudi – 628 006

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Assistant Commissioner(ST) Tuticorin-II Circle Commercial Taxes Department Thoothukudi.

2.The Deputy Commissioner(ST) Commercial Taxes Department, Thoothukudi. ...Respondents

Writ Petitions are filed under article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Ceriorari, to call for the records relating to the impugned order in Ref.No.ZD331125341306T in GSTIN 33AWIPM7525J1ZA dated 19.11.2025 passed by the 1^st respondent under Section 73 of the CGST/TNGST Act for FY 2021-22 quash the same.

1

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

W.P(MD)No.8514 of 2026

For Petitioner :Mr.C.K.Chandrasekar For Respondent :Mr.R.Sureshkumar Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

This writ petition is filed challenging the impugned order dated

19.11.2025.

2.Upon perusal of the impugned orders, it can be seen that the petitioner did not avail the opportunity, when the show cause notice is uploaded and the final order was passed. Accordingly, the impugned orders came to be passed ex-parte.

3.It is contended by the petitioner that the impugned assessment order

was uploaded only in the web portal and therefore, the petitioner did not have awareness to verify the portal and participate in the proceedings.

4.This Court, takes into account the said submission, is of the view that one more opportunity can be granted to the petitioner, however, on condition to pay 25% of the disputed tax amount. This writ petition is ordered on the following terms:

(i)The petitioner shall pay 25% of the disputed tax amount within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of web copy of this order.

2

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

W.P(MD)No.8514 of 2026

(ii)Upon such payment, the impugned order dated 19.11.2025 shall

stand set aside and the matter stands remitted back to the file of the respondent.

(iii)The petitioner shall appear before the respondent without fail and file such reply and produce such documentary evidence in support of his claim and the respondent authority shall pass orders afresh in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible.

(iv) No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

02.04.2026

NCC:Yes/No Ns To

1.The Assistant Commissioner(ST) Tuticorin-II Circle Commercial Taxes Department Thoothukudi.

2.The Deputy Commissioner(ST) Commercial Taxes Department, Thoothukudi.

3

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

W.P(MD)No.8514 of 2026

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

Ns

W.P(MD)No.8514 of 2026 and W.M.P(MD)Nos.6869 and 6897 of 2026

02.04.2026

4

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