Tvl. Rajkumar And Company vs. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer / The Deputy State Tax Officer
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Tvl. Rajkumar and Company, filed a Writ Petition before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court challenging an order dated 17.12.2025 passed by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer/Deputy State Tax Officer, Nilakottai Assessment Circle. This impugned order was issued after a Show Cause Notice dated 26.08.2025, to which the petitioner had submitted a reply on 04.12.2025. The petitioner contended that the respondent passed the order without considering their reply. The Writ Petition was filed on 03.08.2026, after the limitation period for filing an appeal under Section 107 of the respective GST enactments had expired. The petitioner expressed willingness to pre-deposit 25% of the disputed tax.
Held
The Court quashed the impugned order dated 17.12.2025. The primary reason for this decision was the petitioner's submission that their reply to the Show Cause Notice was not considered by the respondent before passing the order, which implies a violation of natural justice. Although the statutory period for filing an appeal under Section 107 of the GST enactments had expired, the Court, in view of the petitioner's undertaking to pre-deposit 25% of the disputed tax, decided to remit the case back to the respondent for de novo adjudication. The Court directed the petitioner to deposit 25% of the disputed tax in cash from their Electronic Cash Register within thirty days of receiving the order. If this condition is met, the respondent is to pass a fresh order on merits within three months. The Court also stipulated that the attachment of the petitioner's bank account, if any, would be lifted upon compliance with the deposit condition, provided the petitioner is not in arrears for any other tax period. If the petitioner fails to comply, the respondent is at liberty to proceed with recovery as if the Writ Petition was dismissed.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned order dated 17.12.2025, passed by the respondent, is liable to be quashed for non-consideration of the petitioner's reply to the Show Cause Notice, contrary to principles of natural justice? 2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to de novo adjudication of the matter, despite the expiry of the statutory period for filing an appeal under Section 107 of the GST enactments, 2017? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the respondent failed to consider their detailed reply to the Show Cause Notice before passing the impugned order, thus violating principles of natural justice. They sought a fresh adjudication of the matter. The petitioner also undertook to pre-deposit 25% of the disputed tax as a condition for such adjudication. Revenue's arguments: The judgment records no specific arguments from the respondent. However, the respondent's counsel took notice of the petition.
Sections Cited
Section 107
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER Mr.R.Parthiban, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for the respondent. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis __________ Page2 of 5
This Writ Petition is taken up for final hearing at the time of admission with the consent of the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Special Government Pleader for the respondent.
In this Writ Petition, the petitioner has challenged the Impugned Order of the respondent, dated 17.12.2025 bearing Reference No. ZD331225269681C/2021-22. 4. The impugned order was preceded by a Show Cause Notice in GST DRC-01 dated 26.08.2025, to which the petitioner had submitted a detailed reply on 04.12.2025. However, without considering the said reply, the respondent proceeded to pass the impugned order.
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 03.08.2026. 6. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is willing to pre-deposit 25% of the disputed tax as a condition for de novo adjudication. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis __________ Page3 of 5
The learned counsel for the petitioner has also made an endorsement to that effect in the Court Bundle, which is extracted hereunder:- “The petitioner undertakes to pay 25% of the disputed tax.”
In view of the above, the impugned order is quashed and the case is remitted back to the respondent to pass a fresh order subject to the petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax in cash 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.
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 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 lifted.
It is made clear that bank attachment shall be lifted subject to the deposit of 25% 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. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis __________ Page4 of 5
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 had been 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. Consequently, connected Writ Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 11-08-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No smn2 To The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer / The Deputy State Tax Officer Nilakottai Assessment Circle, Commercial Taxes Building, 5-2-36-B9, Madurai Road Periyar Colony, Nilakottai - 624 208. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis __________ Page5 of 5 C.SARAVANAN, J. smn2 11-08-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Reproduced from the public record of the Madras High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.