Tvl.Anandam Motors vs. The Superintendent Of CGST And C.Ex
Facts
The petitioner, Tvl. Anandam Motors, represented by its Proprietor John Edward, filed a writ petition before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court. The petition challenged an Order in Original No. 17/2024-GST/SUP/KPT dated 26.08.2024, passed by the Superintendent of CGST and C.Ex, Kariapatti Range, Madurai, and a subsequent rectification order dated 24.04.2026. These orders pertained to the financial year 2019-20. The petitioner sought to quash these orders, arguing they were illegal, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction, particularly in light of an amended Section 16(5) of the TNGST Act, 2017. The petitioner also sought a fresh assessment order after being heard and the refund of any eligible amount collected. The respondent is the Superintendent of CGST and C.Ex.
Held
The Court allowed the writ petition. It set aside the impugned order dated 26.08.2024 and the subsequent rectification order dated 24.04.2026. The matter was remanded back to the respondent to proceed from the stage of personal hearing. The Court directed the assessee to appear before the respondent without fail and submit their reply and supporting documents. The respondent was instructed to consider the matter afresh and pass orders in accordance with the law. The Court also ordered that any attachment of the bank account made pursuant to the impugned order shall stand raised. The Court noted that 100% of the disputed tax amount had been recovered and no additional condition was imposed. The issue regarding Section 16(5) of the TNGST Act was raised, but the primary relief granted was a remand for fresh consideration after affording an opportunity of being heard.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned orders, including the rectification order, passed by the respondent are illegal, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction, especially considering the amended Section 16(5) of the TNGST Act, 2017? (Question of law). The petitioner contended that the orders were illegal and arbitrary, and that the amended Section 16(5) of the TNGST Act, 2017, as inserted by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2024, should be considered. The respondent argued that the petitioner had "missed the bus" regarding the argument related to Section 16(5) of the TNGST Act.
Sections Cited
Section 16(5)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated: 16.06.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY and W.M.P(MD)Nos.12170 and 12171 of 2026 Tvl.Anandam Motors, Rep. by its Proprietor John Edward, GSTIN 33AUCPJ0970C1Z7, No.92/2, 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 the records on the files of the respondent in Order in Original No. 17/ 2024- GST/SUP/KPT in O.C.No. 307/ 2024 dated 26.08.2024 followed by Rectification of order no. 17/2024-GST-SUPDT (Kariapatti range) in O.C.No. 95/ 2026 dated 24.04.2026 for the financial year 2019-20 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary, undue enrichment, without 1 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis juri iction and in view of Amended/inserted Section 16(5) of the TNGST Act 2017 as amended by Finance (No.2) Act 2024 further direct the respondent to pass
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
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.