M/S. Raamdev Logistics vs. The State Tax Officer
Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Raamdev Logistics, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 22.12.2025 passed by the State Tax Officer, Tuticorin-III Circle. The petitioner primarily contended that the order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, as they were not afforded a proper opportunity to be heard. Although a show-cause notice was issued on 10.07.2025, and personal hearing notices were subsequently issued on 03.10.2025, 25.10.2025, and 21.11.2025, the petitioner filed their reply belatedly on 19.12.2025 and could not avail of the personal hearing opportunities. The impugned order led to the freezing of the petitioner's bank account.
Held
The Court held that while the petitioner's delay in filing the reply contributed to the situation, an opportunity should still be granted to address the merits of the discrepancies. The Court found merit in the petitioner's plea regarding the lack of adequate opportunity. Consequently, the impugned order dated 22.12.2025 was set aside, and the matter was remanded back to the file of the first respondent (State Tax Officer). The petitioner was directed to deposit 25% of the disputed tax amount within four weeks. Upon this deposit, the freezing of the bank account would be raised. The petitioner would also be entitled to file additional replies and documents for the first respondent to consider the matter afresh and pass orders in accordance with the law. No costs were imposed.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned order dated 22.12.2025, passed by the State Tax Officer, is liable to be set aside on the grounds of violation of the principles of natural justice and non-compliance with procedural fairness, as argued by the petitioner? 2. Whether the petitioner should be granted an opportunity to present their case afresh, considering the circumstances, as sought by the petitioner? The petitioner argued that the order was passed without providing them with a sufficient opportunity to present their case, thus violating the principles of natural justice. They contended that despite the delay in filing their reply, they should have been given a chance to be heard. The revenue, represented by the Government Standing Counsel, did not present any specific arguments against granting an opportunity to the petitioner but was heard by the Court.
Sections Cited
None explicitly mentioned in the provided text, but the context implies actions under GST law concerning assessment and recovery.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated: 05.06.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY and W.M.P(MD)No.11365 of 2026 M/s. Raamdev Logistics Represented by its Proprietor Venkatesh, S/o. Ramaiya, Door No. 176 C, Ii-Floor, Palai Road, Thootukudi - 628 003, Thootukudi District. ... Petitioner(s) – Vs. - –
The State Tax Officer Tuticorin-Iii Circle, Thoothukudi-District. 2.The Deputy Commissioner (Gst Appeals) (State Tax), Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District. ... Respondent(s) Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of CERTIORARIFIRD MANDAMUS, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent in GSTIN 1 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 33AJFPV4357B1ZB/2021-2022 dated 22.12.2025, and set-aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to defreeze/remove the attachment of the petitioners bank account in HDFC Bank Ltd, North Car Street, Tuticorin and pass such furt
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.