Ravi Coir Pith And Coir Yarn Industry vs. Deputy State Tax Officer - 1
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner challenged an ex-parte order passed by the respondent under GST. The petitioner claimed they did not effectively participate due to lack of technical expertise to access the GSTN portal and reliance on a part-time accountant.
Held
The Court granted the petitioner one more opportunity to participate in the assessment proceedings. This was conditioned on the petitioner paying 25% of the disputed tax amount.
Key Issues
Whether the petitioner was denied a fair opportunity to be heard in the GST assessment proceedings due to technical limitations and lack of knowledge.
Sections Cited
None
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: and
This writ petition is filed challenging the impugned orders dated 10.11.2025. 2.Upon perusal of the impugned orders, it can be seen that the petitioner did not avail the opportunity, when the show cause notice is uploaded and the final order was passed. Accordingly, the impugned orders came to be passed ex-parte.
It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that this is a case where the show cause notice and the orders were uploaded only in the portal and the petitioner has put forth his reasons for not effectively participating during the assessment proceedings. 2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
It is further contended on behalf of the petitioner that owing to her lack of requisite knowledge and technical expertise to access notices and orders on the GSTN Common Portal, she was entirely dependent upon his part time accountant, who failed to inform about the assessment proceedings.
This Court, takes into account the said submission, is of the view that one more opportunity can be granted to the petitioner, however, on condition to pay 25% of the disputed tax amount. This writ petition is ordered on the following terms: (i)The petitioner shall pay 25% of the disputed tax amount within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of web copy of this order. Upon such payment, the impugned order dated 10.11.2025 shall stand set aside and the matter stands remitted back to the file of the respondent. The petitioner shall appear before the respondent without fail and file such reply and produce such documentary evidence in support of his claim and the respondent authority shall pass orders fresh 3 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. (ii)It is also made clear that since the matter is remanded back for fresh disposal upon payment of the 25% of the tax liability, freezing of the petitioner's bank account shall stand raised. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 07.04.2026 Index: Yes Speaking Order: Yes Neutral Citation: No rgm 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis To Deputy State Tax Officer - 1 Nanguneri Circle Commercial Tax Office Buildings Nanguneri Tirunelveli District 627 108. 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
, J.
rgm and W.M.P(MD)No.7648 of 2026 07.04.2026 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.