M/S.Sree Krishna Coconut Product Company vs. The State Tax Officer
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Before: and
This writ petition challenges the impugned order dated 07.11.2025 which is an assessment order passed under Section 73 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: 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Discrepancies found/Grounds on which the assessment is passed Explanation offered by the Assessee on merits Explanation for not availing the opportunity i) Reconciliation of tax liability declared in E- way bill with GSTR-01 showed difference ii) Excess claim of ITC availed w.r.t.
Form GSTR-2A iii) Late fee for belated filing of Form GSTR-1 iv)
Penalty under Section 73 and interest under Section 50 of the GST Act With regard to the difference between the tax liability declared in E-way bill to that of Form GSTR 01 return, certain transactions were completed in the business premises itself and the materials were taken delivery and transported by the purchaser for which the E-way bill was not raised by the petitioner and that is the reason for the variation. As far as the alleged discrepancy of input tax mismatch between form GSTR 3B to that of GSTR 2A, the submits the purchase was covered by proper tax invoice with collection of GST tax as provided under Section 31 of the GST Act and Rule 36 of the GST Rules. As far as levy of late fee, he submits that only due to covid pandemic there was the delay uploading and filing the return and hence, there is no need for adverse inference. In the absence of any excess claim or wrong claim the question of levy of interest under Section 50 and penalty under Section 73 of the GST Act does not arise to the facts of this case. The part time accountant failed to notice the fact of issuing of the proceedings. The respondent had only chosen to upload all the communication, summons, notices, and orders only on the web portal. Because of the above reasons, the petitioner was not able to access the web portal which resulted in the issuance of Ex parte impugned order
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 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis before the respondent assessing officer. This Court has been extending such opportunities on equitable grounds; however, under appropriate conditions. Therefore, an opportunity is granted to the petitioner assessee on the condition of depositing 25% of the disputed tax amount.
In view thereof, this Writ Petition is allowed on the following terms: (i) Within four weeks from the date of receipt of a web copy of the order, the petitioner shall deposit 25% of the disputed tax amount with the respondent, without waiting for a certified copy of the order; (ii) Upon such deposit, the impugned order dated 07.11.2025 shall stand set aside, and the matter shall stand remanded back to the file of the respondent; (iii) 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; (iv) Since the impugned order of assessment is set aside, any attachment of the bank account made pursuant to the impugned order 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis shall stand raised; (v) No costs. Consequently the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
2026 NCC : Yes/No sji TO The State Tax Officer, Vedasandur Assessment Circle, Commercial Tax Building, Dindigul. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J. sji ORDER IN WP(MD) No.17919 of 2026 Date : 25/06/2026 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.