Tvl.Maheswari Trading Company vs. The State Tax Officer
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Tvl. Maheswari Trading Company, represented by its Proprietrix, filed a writ petition challenging an assessment order dated 10.12.2025, passed by the respondent, The State Tax Officer, Tenkasi Assessment Circle. This order was issued under Section 73 of the TNGST Act, 2017, for the financial year 2021-22. The petitioner contended that the impugned order was cryptic, nonspeaking, illegal, arbitrary, and passed without jurisdiction. Specifically, it was argued that the order was passed without any reply to the show cause notice that preceded it. The petitioner offered to deposit 10% of the disputed tax in cash as a condition for a fresh adjudication. The respondent's counsel had no objection to remitting the case back for a fresh order.
Held
The Court quashed the impugned assessment order dated 10.12.2025, subject to the petitioner depositing 10% of the disputed tax in cash within thirty days of receiving a copy of the order. The Court directed the petitioner to file a reply to the notice preceding the impugned order, treating the impugned order as an addendum to the show cause notice. Upon compliance, the respondent was directed to pass fresh orders on merits and in accordance with law, preferably within three months, after hearing the petitioner. The Court noted that if the petitioner failed to comply with the stipulations, the respondent was at liberty to proceed as if the writ petition was dismissed. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided, as the matter was disposed of based on the petitioner's undertaking and the respondent's no objection.
Key Issues
1. Whether the assessment order dated 10.12.2025, passed by the respondent under Section 73 of the TNGST Act, 2017, is liable to be quashed for being cryptic, nonspeaking, illegal, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction, particularly for being passed without considering the petitioner's reply to the show cause notice. Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the impugned order was unsustainable as it was passed without providing an opportunity of being heard and without addressing the reply to the show cause notice. The order was described as cryptic and nonspeaking, indicating a lack of proper adjudication. The petitioner undertook to deposit 10% of the disputed tax in cash to facilitate a de novo adjudication. Respondent's arguments: The learned Counsel for the State of Tamil Nadu had no objection to the case being remitted back to the respondent for passing a fresh order.
Sections Cited
Section 73
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: and
This Writ Petition is taken up for 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.
This Writ Petition is filed to challenge the impugned assessment order dated 10.12.2025 in FORM GST DRC-07 passed by the respondent under Section 73 of the respective GST enactments, 2017, for the Financial Year 2021-22. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, submits that the petitioner will deposit 10% of the disputed tax in cash as a condition for de novo adjudication as the impugned order has been passed without any reply to the show cause notice that preceded the impugned order. The endorsement of the learned 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis counsel for the petitioner on behalf of the petitioner reads as under: ‘The Writ Petitioner undertakes to pay 10% of disputed tax.’
The learned Counsel for State of TN for the respondents has no objection for remitting the case back to the respondent to pass a fresh order in lieu of the impugned order.
Recording the same, the impugned order stands quashed subject to the petitioner depositing 10% of the disputed tax in cash as undertaken within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
The petitioner shall file a reply to the notice that preceded the impugned order by treating the impugned order as addendum to the Show Cause Notice.
In case the petitioner complies with the above stipulations, the respondent shall proceed to pass fresh orders on merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three (3) months thereafter, after hearing the petitioner. 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
In case the petitioner fails to comply with any of the conditions stipulated above, the respondent is at liberty to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with law as if this Writ Petition was dismissed in limine today.
This Writ Petition is disposed of, with the above observations. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Index : Yes / No 15.07.2026 Internet : Yes / No apd To The State Tax Officer, Tenkasi Assessment Circle, Commercial Taxes Buildings, Tenkasi – 627811. 4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.SARAVANAN, J.
apd
2026 5/5 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.