Tvl Sri Balaji Traders vs. The State Tax Officer - Madras High Court, 19 June 2026

Before: and

This writ petition challenges the impugned order dated 15.12.2025, 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 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 i)Non submission of supporting documents for the claim

of exemption

on Exempted/ Nil rated/

GST Supplies ii) Penalty under section 73 and interest

under section 50 of the GST Act The very same respondent for the above year vide his proceedings in form GST DRC 07 Ref. No. ZD3312252708857 dated 17.12.2025 had under the caption ITC to be reversed on non-business transactions and exempt supplies as per Rule 42 and 43 of the GST had reversed an ITC of Rs.80,669/- (CGST and SGST of Rs.38,542/- each and IGST of Rs.3,585/-) During the above year he had effected exempted sales of unprocessed/raw maize for Rs.19,01,869.75 which was wrongly assessed to tax at 18% for the alleged reason of non filing of supporting documents. The unprocessed/ raw maize which false under HSN code: 1005 his exempt from tax 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 Partee impugned order 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. Since it is stated that 31% of the disputed tax amount towards CGST and 100% towards SGST had already been recovered, no additional condition is imposed.

In view thereof, this Writ Petition is ordered on the following terms: i. The impugned order dated 15.12.2025 shall stand set aside and the matter shall stand remanded back to the file of the respondent for reconsideration. 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. 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 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 shall stand closed. 19.06.2026 (1/2) Neutral Citation: No rgm To The State Tax Officer, Commercial Tax Building Thirupathur 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

, J.

rgm and W.M.P(MD)No.12498 of 2026 19.06.2026 (1/2) 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis