Tvl.Pravin Construction And Transport Contractor vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Before: and
This writ petition challenges the impugned order dated 29.12.2025 which is an assessment orders passed under Section 74 of the TNGST Act, 2017. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Standing Counsel for the respondent.
By the impugned order, the assessment was made ex-parte because the petitioner did not utilise the opportunities provided. The discrepancies and grounds on which the assessment order was issued, the dealer's explanation on merits, and the reasons for not participating in the assessment proceedings are summarised briefly and presented in a table below: Discrepancies found/Grounds on which the assessment is passed Explanation offered by the Assessee on merits Explanation for not availing the opportunity ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Difference
turnover between GSTR-3B and GSTR 7 The respondent miserably failed to consider the fact that an earlier demand order had already been raised on the very same allegation on which the present ex parte order came to be passed. Had the respondent considered the same or afforded the petitioner an effective opportunity of personal hearing, the petitioner could have satisfactorily explained the issue. However, the respondent failed to do so, which amounts to gross violation of the principles of natural justice. Hence, on that ground alone, the impugned order passed by the respondent is liable to be quashed. The petitioner has now come to know that the entire tax amount has already been recovered from the petitioner's electronic credit ledger. The show cause notice and the impugned assessment order has been uploaded in the GST Portal without knowledge of the petitioner.
Considering the nature of the discrepancies noted, the explanation provided by the assessee and the reason given before this Court for not availing the opportunity, I believe that an opportunity can be granted to the assessee to present their submissions and produce the relevant supporting documents before the respondent assessing officer. This Court has been extending such opportunities on equitable grounds; however, under appropriate conditions. But, ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis in this case, the entire disputed tax amount has already been recovered from the petitioner, no additional condition is imposed.
In view thereof, this Writ Petition is allowed on the following terms: (i) The impugned order dated 29.12.2025 shall stand set aside, and the matter shall stand remanded back to the file of the respondent; (ii) The assessee shall appear before the respondent without fail and submit their reply and documents in support of their claim, and it is for the respondent to consider the matter afresh and pass orders in accordance with law; (iii) Since the impugned order of assessment is set aside, any attachment of the bank account made pursuant to the impugned order shall stand raised; (iv) No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 25.06.2026 NCC : No (1/3) smn2 ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis To:- The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Madurai Rural East Assessment Circle, Madurai. ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
, J.
smn2
2026 (1/3) ____________ 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.