M/S. Sri Vaira Balaji Fireworks vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Tax
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Sri Vaira Balaji Fireworks, represented by its Partner V. Raja, filed a writ petition before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court. The petition challenged an order in Form DRC-07 dated April 22, 2026, passed by the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Sivakasi III Circle (the third respondent). This order pertained to the tax period between April 2025 and November 2025. The petitioner sought to quash the impugned order and requested the third respondent to re-consider the case regarding the clubbing of amounts from individual accounts, in accordance with law, after affording a personal hearing. The court noted that similar matters concerning assessment years 2020-21 and 2023-24 had previously been decided by the court.
Held
The Court quashed the impugned order dated April 22, 2026, and remitted the matter back to the third respondent (Assistant Commissioner (ST)) for passing a fresh order. This was subject to the condition that the petitioner deposits 10% of the disputed tax in cash from their Electronic Cash Register within thirty days of receiving a copy of the order. The Court directed that if the petitioner complied with this stipulation, the third respondent should proceed to pass a final order on merits and in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within three months of the pre-deposit. The Court also ordered that the attachment of the petitioner's bank account shall stand automatically vacated upon compliance with the deposit condition. It was clarified that the bank attachment would be lifted subject to the deposit and the petitioner not being in arrears for any other tax period, barring the amount demanded under the impugned order. The ratio decidendi is that in cases with identical facts and where previous orders of the High Court exist, the matter should be remitted back for fresh consideration upon a partial pre-deposit of the disputed tax, ensuring principles of natural justice are followed.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned order dated April 22, 2026, passed by the Assistant Commissioner (ST) is liable to be quashed as illegal, unjust, unfair, and in excess of jurisdiction, violating principles of natural justice? 2. Whether the third respondent should be directed to re-consider the case regarding the clubbing of amounts available in individual persons' accounts in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of personal hearing? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the impugned order was illegal, unjust, unfair, and passed in excess of jurisdiction, violating principles of natural justice. They sought a re-consideration of the case concerning the clubbing of amounts from individual accounts. The petitioner also relied on previous orders passed by this Court in similar matters. Respondents' Contention: The respondents, represented by the learned Special Government Pleader, took notice of the petition. No specific arguments were recorded for the respondents in the provided text.
Sections Cited
Section 107
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: and
Mr.R.Parthiban, learned Special Government Pleader, takes notice for the respondents.
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 respondents. 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
This petitioner is before this Court against the Impugned Order in Form DRC-07 dated 22-04-2026 bearing Reference No. ZD3304261964273 / GSTIN 33ADTFS1917L1ZL, passed by the third respondent for the tax period between April 2025 and November 2025. 4. Already a similar matter pertains to the Assessment Year 2020-21 came up for consideration before this Court in W.P.(MD) No. 18566 of 2026, which came to be ordered on 16.07.2026, and for the assessment year 2023-24 in W.P. No. 22199 of 2026, where came to be ordered on 04.08.2026. 5. For the sake of clarity, the order passed on 16.07.2026 in W.P.(MD) No. 18566 of 2026 has been reproduced below:
“5. Considering the above, I am inclined to remit the matter back to the third respondent to pass a fresh order, subject to the condition that the petitioner deposits 10% of the disputed tax confirmed by the impugned order, which the petitioner would otherwise have been required to deposit under Section 107 of the respective GST Enactments for filing an appeal before the Appellate Authority.
Accordingly, the impugned order is quashed and the matter is remitted to the third respondent to pass a fresh order, subject to the petitioner complying with the above condition. The petitioner is 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis directed to cooperate with the third respondent and also file an additional reply, if any.”
Considering the fact that the facts are identical, the impugned orders are quashed and the matter is remitted back to the third 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 this order.
In case the petitioner complies with the above stipulations, the third 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 shall also stand automatically vacated.
It is made clear that bank attachment shall be lifted subject to the deposit of 10% of the disputed tax as ordered above and the petitioner not being in arrears 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis of any other amount for any other tax period barring the amount demanded under the impugned Order.
This Writ Petition is disposed of, with the above observations. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Index : Yes / No 10.08.2026 Internet : Yes / No apd To 1. The Commissioner of Commercial Tax, O/o.The Principal Secretary / Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai- 600005. 2. The Joint Commissioner (ST). Madurai Road, Near VVV Women College, Virudunagar.
The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Sivakasi III Circle, Commercial Tax Building, Satchiyapuram, Sivakasi -- 626123, Virudunagar District. 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.