Tvl.Essdee Projects Engineering Private Limited vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Before: and
This writ petition challenges the impugned order dated 30.12.2025 which is an assessment order 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 representing the revenue.
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 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Discrepancies found/Grounds on which the order is passed Explanation offered by the Assessee on merits Explanation for not availing the opportunity The respondent alleged excess availment of Input Tax Credit based on mismatch
between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A for AY 2021-22. The difference reflected in the auto-populated portal data was treated as ineligible ITC and a demand of Rs.11,96,519/- together with interest and penalty was confirmed under Section 74 of the TNGST Act. The respondent proceeded
on the assumption that every GSTR-2A
mismatch automatically represents wrongful availment of ITC. The objections filed by the petitioner were rejected mainly for want of supporting documents. The impugned order was passed
without undertaking supplier-wise or
invoice-wise verification. The petitioner had specifically disputed the allegation and stated that no excess ITC had been availed during the relevant assessment year. The ITC claimed was supported by valid tax invoices, purchase registers, books of account and reconciliation
statements maintained in the ordinary course of business. The respondent failed to follow Circular No.183/15/2022-GST and Circular No.193/05/2023- GST,
which mandate verification of underlying records before denying ITC. GSTR-2A is only a facilitator statement and cannot be the sole basis for reversal of credit without
examining
the genuineness purchases. In of the absence of any finding that the transactions were bogus or that tax had not reached the Government, the ITC reversal is arbitrary and unsustainable. The petitioner had entrusted GST compliances and portal monitoring to a part-time accountant due to lack of technical knowledge of GST procedures. Though a reply was filed, the accountant failed to inform the petitioner about subsequent notices, hearing dates and the requirement to produce supporting records. Since all communications
were uploaded only in the GST portal,
the petitioner remained unaware of the progress of the proceedings. Consequently,
purchase registers,
ledger
and invoices,
extracts reconciliation
statements could not be produced before the respondent.
The impugned assessment order was therefore passed without affording an effective and meaningful opportunity to substantiate the petitioner's case. 3 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
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. Therefore, an opportunity is granted to the petitioner assessee on the condition of depositing 25% of the disputed tax amount.
In view of this, the writ petition is allowed on the following terms:- i. Within four weeks of receiving the 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 orders dated 29.12.2025 shall stand set aside, and the matter shall stand remanded back to the file of the respondent. 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 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 shall stand raised. v. No costs. Consequently the connected miscellaneous petition shall stand closed. 24.06.2026 NCC:Yes/No rgm To The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Karur-2 Assessment Circle, Commercial Taxes Building, North Pradhakshnam Road, Karur – 639001. 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
, J.
rgm and W.M.P(MD)No.13036 of 2026 24.06.2026 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.