M/S.M.Antony Selvan Contractor vs. Commercial Tax Officer
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s.M.Antony Selvan Contractor, represented by its Proprietor, challenged an order dated 23.03.2026 passed by the Commercial Tax Officer, Tiruchendur Assessment Circle, Tuticorin. This order was issued under Section 74 of the GST enactments for the tax period 2023-24, following a Show Cause Notice dated 06.01.2026. The petitioner had not availed the opportunity for a personal hearing and consequently suffered the impugned order. The petitioner filed the present Writ Petition on 28.07.2026, after the limitation period for filing an appeal under Section 107 of the GST enactments had expired.
Held
The Court quashed the impugned order dated 23.03.2026 and remitted the matter back to the respondent for reconsideration. 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 a copy of the order. Additionally, the petitioner was directed to file a reply to the Show Cause Notice dated 06.01.2026, along with supporting documents, within the same period. The impugned order was to be treated as an addendum to the Show Cause Notice. If the petitioner complied with these conditions, the respondent was to pass a final order on merits within three months of the reply and pre-deposit. Failure to comply would allow the respondent to recover the tax as if the writ petition was dismissed. The respondent was also directed to provide due notice to the petitioner before passing any further order. The Court explicitly noted that the limitation for filing an appeal had expired.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned order dated 23.03.2026, passed under Section 74 of the GST enactments, is liable to be quashed due to procedural irregularities or lack of opportunity for the petitioner to present their case? The petitioner argued that they were willing to pre-deposit 10% of the disputed tax amount as a condition for de novo adjudication, indicating a desire to address the merits of the case. The petitioner's counsel made an endorsement to this effect. The respondent, represented by the State counsel, took notice of the petition.
Sections Cited
Section 74, Section 107
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: and
Mr.R.Parthiban, 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 Order dated 23.03.2026 bearing reference in GSTIN:33ALEPA9443N1ZZ/2023-24, passed under Section 74 of the respective GST enactments, 2017, by the respondent for the tax period 2023-24, which was preceded by a Show Cause Notice in DRC 01 dated 06.01.2026, wherein the petitioner was also called upon to appear for personal hearing. However, the petitioner had not taken advantage 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis of the same and thus, suffered the Impugned Order dated 23.03.2026. 4. 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 28.07.2026. 5. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is willing to pre-deposit 10% of the disputed tax 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:-
“The petitioner will deposit 10% of the disputed tax amount as per the direction of this Hon’ble Court.”
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.
Within such time, the petitioner shall also file a reply to the Show Cause Notice in DRC 01 dated 06.01.2026, together with requisite documents to substantiate the case by treating the Impugned Order dated 23.03.2026 as an addendum to the Show Cause Notice dated 06.01.2026. 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.
Needless to state, before passing any such order, the respondent shall give due notice to the petitioner. 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
This Writ Petition stands disposed of, with the above observations. No costs. Consequently, connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. Index : Yes / No 29.07.2026 Internet : Yes / No apd To Commercial Tax Officer, Tiruchendur Assessment Circle, Tuticorin, Tamil Nadu. 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.