T.R.Thamilarasu vs. The Superintendent
Facts
The petitioner, T.R. Thamilarasu, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 22.12.2023 passed by the Superintendent of CGST and Central Excise (first respondent) under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017, and a subsequent appellate order dated 19.11.2025 passed by the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) (second respondent). The impugned orders fastened liability on the petitioner because they failed to produce a seller's certificate. The petitioner initially argued it was not incumbent upon them to produce this certificate but later stated they were in possession of it and could produce it if given an opportunity. The revenue contended that the petitioner should have substantiated their defence by producing the certificate before the authorities.
Held
The Court held that an opportunity should be granted to the petitioner to produce the seller's certificate. The reasoning was that the petitioner now claims to be in possession of the certificate, which is intended to prove that GST had been suffered on the inputs, a point that the authorities had found unproven by the petitioner. The Court stipulated that this opportunity would be subject to the condition of depositing 25% of the disputed tax amount. Since the petitioner had already deposited 10% at the time of filing the appeal, they were directed to deposit the remaining 15% within four weeks. Upon this deposit, the impugned order of the first respondent would be set aside, and the matter would be remanded back to the first respondent for fresh consideration. The petitioner would then be required to file additional replies and produce the seller certificate and other supporting documents, which the first respondent would consider to pass fresh orders.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner should be granted an opportunity to produce the seller's certificate, given that they now possess it and it is crucial for substantiating their claim that GST had been suffered on inputs, as per the reasoning of the authorities? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that while they initially contended it was not incumbent upon them to produce the seller's certificate, they are now in possession of the certificate and are ready to produce it if an opportunity is granted. Revenue's Argument: The revenue argued that when the petitioner raised such a defence, it was incumbent upon them to substantiate it by producing the seller's certificate before the authorities.
Sections Cited
Section 73
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated: 21.04.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY and W.M.P.(MD).No.8787 of 2026 T.R.Thamilarasu ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Superintendent, Office of the Superintendent of CGST and Central Excise, Virudhunagar-II Range, Virudhunagar. 2.The Joint Commissioner (Appeals), Circuit Office at Madurai, No.4, Lal Bahadur Sasthri Road, GST Bhawan, Bibikulam, Madurai-625 002. ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for records pertaining to the impugned proceedings passed by the first respondent vide his order in original No. GST/VNR-II/SUPT/48/ 2023 dated 22-12-2023 and consequential order passed by the second respondent in 1 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis File Number A. No. 27/2024-GST and quash the same as it is illegal, without juri iction and in gross violation of the principle of natural justice.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Satheesh Murugan For Respondents : Mr.R.Gowri Shankar, Senior Standing Counsel for CGST-Customs ORDE
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.