M/S.Thirukumaran Traders vs. The State Tax Officer
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Thirukumaran Traders, challenged an assessment order dated 18.12.2025, passed by the Respondent, the State Tax Officer, Palani. This order was issued under Section 73 of the GST enactments for the assessment year 2021-22, following a Show Cause Notice dated 29.09.2025. The petitioner did not avail the personal hearing offered in the Show Cause Notice and consequently suffered the impugned order. The petitioner filed the present Writ Petition on 07.08.2026, after the limitation period for filing an appeal under Section 107 of the GST enactments had expired. The petitioner stated they are engaged in maize trading, which they believe is an exempted supply.
Held
The Court quashed the impugned order dated 18.12.2025 and remitted the case back to the respondent for fresh adjudication. This decision was made subject to the petitioner depositing 10% of the disputed tax in cash from their Electronic Cash Register within thirty days of receiving the order. This concession was granted based on the petitioner's submission that their supply of maize is exempted under the GST enactments. The petitioner was also directed to file a reply to the Show Cause Notice dated 29.09.2025, along with supporting documents, treating the impugned order as an addendum to the Show Cause Notice. The respondent is to pass a final order on merits within three months of the petitioner's compliance. If the petitioner fails to comply, the respondent can proceed to recover the tax as if the writ petition was dismissed. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned assessment order dated 18.12.2025, passed under Section 73 of the GST enactments, is liable to be quashed on the grounds raised by the petitioner? The petitioner argued that their supply of maize is exempted under the GST enactments. They also expressed willingness to pre-deposit 10% of the disputed tax amount as a condition for de novo adjudication. The petitioner relied on their submission that the supply is exempted. The respondent, represented by the State Tax Officer, did not record any specific arguments in the judgment, but had issued the impugned order.
Sections Cited
Section 73, Section 107
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: and
M/s.P.Sudarkodi Natchiyar, learned Counsel for State of TN, takes notice for the respondent.
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 Counsel for State of TN for the respondent.
In this Writ Petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned Assessment Order dated 18.12.2025 bearing reference in Ref.No. ZD331225292041T for the assessment year 2021-22 passed under section 73 of the respective GST enactments, 2017, by the respondent, which was preceded by a Show Cause Notice in GST DRC 01 dated 29.09.2025, wherein the petitioner was also called upon to appear for personal hearing. However, the petitioner had not taken advantage of the same and thus, suffered the impugned Order dated 18.12.2025. 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
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 07.08.2026. 5. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as the petitioner is engaging in maize tranding, the supply made by the petitioner is exempted under the provisions of respective GST enactments, 2017 and however, the petitioner is willing to pre-deposit 10% of the disputed tax as confirmed by the impugned order as a condition for de novo adjudication.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has also made an endorsement to that effect in the Court Bundle, which is extracted hereunder:-
“I agree to pay 10% disputed tax amount.”
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 10% 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 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis this order. The above concession is given only in view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the supply made by the petitioner is exempted under the provisions of respective GST enactments, 2017. 8. Within such time, the petitioner shall also file a reply to the Show Cause Notice in GST DRC 01 dated 29.09.2025 together with requisite documents to substantiate the case by treating the Impugned Order dated 18.12.2025 as an addendum to the Show Cause Notice dated 29.09.2025. 9. 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.
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. 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
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. Index : Yes / No 10.08.2026 Internet : Yes / No apd To The State Tax Officer, Palani 1 Assessment Circle, Integrated Commercial Taxes Offices, Near Periya Avudaiyar Kovil Arch, Kothaimangalam Village, Palani 624 618. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.SARAVANAN, J.
apd
2026 6/6 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.