Muthupandiyan vs. The Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services Tax And Central Excise
Original PDF →No AI summary yet for this judgment.
Before: and
This Writ Petition is filed challenging the impugned order-in- Original No.01/AC/CGST/2026/RJPM dated 16.02.2026 issued by the respondent. The impugned order is the order of assessment passed under Section 74 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Act, 2017. 2.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the subject matter in dispute pertains to the levy of GST on seigniorage fees, which is presently pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. Pending the same, this Court has already held that the authorities shall await for the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. 3.Per contra, the learned Government Standing Counsel would submit that this Court has been directing the proceedings to be completed; however, the orders of the Appellate Authority were directed to be kept in abeyance until the orders are passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
The learned Government Standing Counsel would produce the orders passed by this Court in M/s.Marginal M sand, Represented by its authorities have to await the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. 6.As far as the present case is concerned, it is seen that the order of assessment has been passed. However, the petitioner did not avail the opportunity when the show cause notice was issued and also failed to submit the necessary documents factually supporting their claim. 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
In view thereof, considering the fact that the very incidence of tax itself is at large, I am of the view that the petitioner can be granted an opportunity. Normally, this Court imposes a condition of deposit of 25% while granting such an opportunity on equitable considerations. However, since in this case the very incidence of tax itself is at large, no such additional condition is imposed on the petitioner. 8.This Writ Petition is allowed on the following terms:- (i)The impugned order dated 16.02.2026 shall stand set aside and the matters shall stand remanded back to the file of the respondent for fresh consideration. (ii)Within two weeks from the date of receipt of a web copy of the order, the petitioner shall file such reply along with supporting documents in support of their claim and it is for the respondent to consider the matter afresh. However, final orders shall be kept in abeyance until the orders are passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis (iii)If the order is in favour of the petitioner, then there is no difficulty. (iv)If the order results in the assessment of tax or imposition of penalty, the same shall be communicated to the petitioner. However, enforcement and further demand of the liability so determined shall be kept in abeyance until the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. (v)As and when the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India pronounces its Judgment, the petitioner shall be entitled to take further steps, subject to the outcome of the said Judgment. (vi)No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 11.06.2026 NCS : Yes/No rgm 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY.,J. rgm To 1. The Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax and Central Excise, Madurai Commissionerate, C.R. Building, Bibikulam, Madurai - 625002. 2. The Assistant Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax and Central Excise, Rajapalayam Division, 1/15, Shenbagathoppu Road, Rajapalayam -626117. and W.M.P(MD)No.11765 of 2026 11.06.2026 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.