Tvl. Sri Dhanalakshmi Bottles vs. The State Tax Officer Cum Commercial Tax Officer

Original PDF →
WP(MD)/19581/2026HC MadrasGSTCNR HCMD01092684202610 July 2026Bench: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE C. SARAVANAN5 pages

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Before: and

The petitioner is before this Court against the impugned assessment order dated 18.12.2025. The impugned order has been passed for the tax period 2021-22 in the absence of a reply to the show cause notice in DRC-01 dated 29.08.2025. By the impugned order, a total amount of Rs.14,54,313/- has been demanded from the petitioner together with the interest and penalty, on account of the alleged wrongful availment of Input Tax Credit apart from demand on ITC claimed contrary to Section 17(5) of the respective GST enactment.

2.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a sum of Rs.3,21,453/- has already been recovered on 03.07.2026, which is more than 25% of the disputed tax. He further submits that the petitioner may be given one more opportunity to explain the case afresh, as the petitioner failed to respond to the notice in GST DRC-01 dated 29.08.2025 issued to the aforesaid taxpayer.

3.

The learned counsel for the State of TN appearing for the respondent, however, is unable to confirm whether the aforesaid recovery of Rs.3,21,453/- on 03.07.2026 was made towards the disputed tax. 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

4.

Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State of TN, I am of the view that this is a fit case for remitting the case back to the respondent, subject to verification that the amount recovered on 03.07.2026 directly from the petitioner's bank account is towards the disputed tax liability.

5.

In case the aforesaid amount of Rs.3,21,453/-, which is said to have been recovered directly from the petitioner's bank account on 03.07.2026, was towards the disputed tax liability of Rs.8,33,290/-, no further pre-deposit shall be made by the petitioner as a condition for de novo adjudication. Therefore, the same shall be verified. In the alternative, the petitioner shall deposit 25% of the disputed tax.

6.

In view of the above, the impugned order dated 18.12.2025 is quashed, subject to the petitioner complying with the above stipulation and filing a reply within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, by treating the impugned order as an addendum to the Show Cause Notice in GST DRC-01 dated 29.08.2025. The respondent shall proceed to pass final orders on merits. Subject to the above verification, the attachment of the petitioner's bank 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis account if any shall stand lifted.

7.

This Writ Petition stands disposed of with the above observations. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.

10.07.

2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Indu To The State Tax Officer cum Commercial Tax Officer, Theni – 1 Assessment Circle, Theni. 4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.SARAVANAN, J.

Indu W.P(MD).No.19581 of 2026

10.07.

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.