Tvl.Sree Maruthi Constructions vs. The State Tax Officer

Original PDF →
WP(MD)/17189/2026HC MadrasGSTCNR HCMD01081179202622 June 2026Bench: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY6 pages

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
WP(MD). No.17189 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 22.06.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY WP(MD). No.17189 of 2026 and WMP(MD).No.12718 of 2026 Tvl.Sree Maruthi Constructions, Represented by its Managing Partner : Mathiyalagan, 216-3-4 Vaigai Dam Road, Periyakulam Taluk, Theni District 625 562. ... Petitioner Vs 1.The State Tax Officer, Theni-I Assessment Circle, Commercial Taxes Buildings, Theni District. 2.The Commercial Tax Officer, Theni-I Assessment Circle, Commercial Taxes Buildings, Theni District. ... Respondents PRAYER :- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent vide his proceedings in GSTIN 33ABGFS3299A1ZA/ 2021-22, dated 17.12.2025 and its consequential summary order passed by the 2nd respondent bearing 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP(MD). No.17189 of 2026 Reference No.ZD331225283261O, Period APR 2021-MAR 2022, F.Y. 2021-2022, dated 18.12.2025 and quash the same as it is illegal, without jurisdiction and in gross violation of Principles of Natural Justice and further direct the respondents to re-do the assessment afresh after providing him an opportunity of personal hearing as per the provisions of the GST Act. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Satheesh Murugan For Respondents : Ms.P.Sudarkodi Nachiar Government Standing Counsel

ORDER This writ petition challenges the impugned order dated 17.12.2025 and the consequential summary order dated 18.12.2025, which are 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 respondents.

3.

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 Order is passed Explanation offered by the Assessee on merits Explanation for not availing the opportunity Rate

of tax supplies made to TDS deductors Actually there exists no such alleged under declaration of tax payable as per returns as estimated by the respondent with reference to verification of TDS and GSTR-2A and I have paid the entire liability in the month of March 2022 GSTR-3B monthly return itself. But, the respondent has utterly failed to consider the same. The show cause notice and impugned order have uploaded in the GST portal. The accountant never informed in the above. Hence, could not be able to take further steps within time. Excess claim of ITC availed w.r.t GTR-2A The petitioner has claimed ITC on eligible inward supply. Even the above issue is covered under Circular No.193/5/2023 dated 17.07.2023. As per the above, circular, the petitioner is eligible for claim of ITC. -do-

4.

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 respondents 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. 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

5.

It is stated that 21% of the CGST and 18% of the SGST have already been recovered. Normally, this Court grants an opportunity on the equitable condition of depositing 25% of the disputed tax. Therefore, in this case, the petitioner shall deposit the balance 4% and 7%, respectively.

6.

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 this order, the petitioner shall deposit 7% of the CGST and 4% of the SGST with the respondents, without waiting for a certified copy of the order; (ii) Upon such deposit, the impugned order dated 17.12.2025 and the consequential summary order dated 18.12.2025 shall stand set aside, and the matter shall stand remanded back to the file of the respondents; (iii) The assessee shall appear before the respondents without fail and submit their reply and documents in support of their claim, and it is for the respondents to consider the matter afresh and pass orders in accordance with law; 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis (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 is closed.

22.06.

2026 sji NCC : Yes/No TO 1.The State Tax Officer, Theni-I Assessment Circle, Commercial Taxes Buildings, Theni District. 2.The Commercial Tax Officer, Theni-I Assessment Circle, Commercial Taxes Buildings, Theni District. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J. sji ORDER IN WP(MD) No.17189 of 2026 Date : 22/06/2026 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.