Magaliswamy Sriram vs. The State Tax Officer
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Before: and
This writ petition challenges the impugned order dated 26.12.2025 which is an assessment order passed under Section 73 of the TNGST Act, 2017, for the assessment year 2021-22. 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 Order is passed Explanation offered by the Assessee on merits Explanation for not availing the opportunity Mismatch of credit between the credit availed
and credit figuring in GSTR2A, non reversal of credit
on exempted supplies, ineligible credit and delayment availment of credit for the tax
period 2021-22 under Section 73 of GST Act. Prior to 01.01.2022, ITC cannot be denied solely because invoices do not reflect in Form GSTR-2A, as no statutory provision mandated this. Lacking statutory backing or the evidence of the supplier's non-payment, such a denial based on presumption is legally unsustainable. Since the petitioner dealt in agricultural products and availed no input credit, no reversal is required. The respondent's contradictory stand is impermissible, given the department already demanded tax via the 18.12.2025 order by treating exempted supplies as taxable. Rejecting inputs as ineligible by nomenclature without verifying their business utility violates GST Act provisions. All the notices and orders were served in the web portal.
The petitioner did not notice the show cause notice in the web portal.
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 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 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 this 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 26.12.2025 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; 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 petitions are closed.
2026 sji NCC: Yes/No To The State Tax Officer-2, Ponmalai Assessment Circle, Commercial Taxes Department Campus, Trichy-620020. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J. sji
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.