A.Vadivel vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer 1
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, A. Vadivel, filed a Writ Petition before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court challenging an order dated 03.03.2026 passed by the Deputy State Tax Officer. This order was issued pursuant to a Show Cause Notice dated 24.09.2025. The petitioner contended that he did not file a reply to the Show Cause Notice and was not provided an opportunity to submit documents, leading to the impugned order. The Writ Petition was filed on 31.07.2026, after the limitation period for filing an appeal under Section 107 of the GST enactments had expired. The petitioner expressed willingness to pre-deposit 25% of the disputed tax.
Held
The Court quashed the impugned order dated 03.03.2026. The case was remitted back to the respondent for fresh adjudication, subject to the petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax in cash from his Electronic Cash Register within thirty days of receiving the order. The petitioner was also directed to file a reply to the Show Cause Notice dated 24.09.2025, along with requisite documents, treating the impugned order as an addendum. If these conditions were met, the respondent was to pass a final order on merits expeditiously, preferably within three months. The attachment of the petitioner's bank account, if any, would be lifted upon compliance. The Court also stipulated that if the petitioner failed to comply, the respondent could proceed to recover the tax as if the Writ Petition was dismissed. The respondent was also directed to provide due notice before passing any further order. The issue of whether the original order was illegal or without jurisdiction was implicitly addressed by the quashing and remittal, based on the violation of natural justice.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned order dated 03.03.2026, passed by the Deputy State Tax Officer, is liable to be quashed for being illegal, without jurisdiction, and in violation of the principles of natural justice, particularly concerning the lack of opportunity to the petitioner to file a reply and submit documents? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the impugned order was passed without providing him with an adequate opportunity to respond to the Show Cause Notice and submit supporting documents, thus violating the principles of natural justice. The petitioner also acknowledged that the statutory appeal period had expired and sought de novo adjudication. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondent revenue authority. However, the respondent was represented and 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 Ms.P.Sudarkodi Natchiyar, learned Government Advocate (Taxes) 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 the learned Government Advocate (Taxes) for the respondent.
In this Writ Petition, the petitioner has challenged the Impugned Order dated 03.03.2026 bearing reference in Temp ID : 332500002389TMP/2022-23 of the respondent.
The Impugned Order was preceded by a Show Cause Notice in GST DRC 01 dated 24.09.2025 and the petitioner has not filed his reply and had not been provided an opportunity to submit documents to substantiate the same and thus, suffered the Impugned Order dated 03.03.2026. 5. 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 31.07.2026. 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 is ready to pay at 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.
Within such time, the petitioner shall also file a reply to the Show Cause Notice in DRC 01 dated 24.09.2025 together with requisite documents to substantiate the case by treating the Impugned Order dated 03.03.2026 as an addendum to the Show Cause Notice dated 24.09.2025. 10. 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 lifted. 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 was 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 Petitions are closed. 06-08-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No smn2 To The Deputy State Tax Officer 1 Pudukkottai - 3 Assessment Circle, Pudukkottai. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis __________ Page5 of 5 C.SARAVANAN, J. smn2 06-08-2026 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.