BharatTaxGST

M/S. Solsun Lifecare Private Limited vs. The State Tax Officer

Original PDF →
WP(MD)/10312/2026HC MadrasGSTCNR HCMD01052194202610 April 2026Bench: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR4 pages

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
W.P.(MD)No.10312 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 10.04.2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR W.P.(MD)No.10312 of 2026 and W.M.P(MD)No.8107 of 2026 M/s. Solsun Lifecare Private Limited Represented by its Director G.Monian, No.19 D2, Ramanputhoor, Thattanvilai Road, Nagercoil 629 001, Kanyakumari District .. Petitioner – Vs. - The State Tax Officer, Nagercoil-1, Mead Street, Nagercoil 629 001 .. Respondent Prayer: Writ Petition is 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 file of the respondent in GSTIN 33AAXCS3278A1Z6/2019-20, dated 22.08.2024 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary without jurisdiction and in violation of the principles of natural justice and consequently direct the respondent to pass fresh assessment order, after affording an opportunity to the petitioner to submit reply to the notice and personal hearing. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Karunakar For Respondent : Mr.R.Sureshkumar Additional Government Pleader 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.10312 of 2026

ORDER The petitioner challenges the assessment order dated 22.08.2024 passed by the sole respondent, whereby a demand was raised for payment of a sum of Rs.14,709/- towards CGST, SGST, and IGST, a sum of Rs.11,495/- towards interest, and a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards penalty.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the assessment was made ex parte and, therefore, the same has adversely affected the petitioner’s rights and defence.

3.

The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent submitted that notice had been issued through the online portal and, despite service of notice, the petitioner did not choose to file any objections. Therefore, according to the respondent, the assessment order does not warrant interference.

4.

Admittedly, notice was issued to the petitioner. However, the petitioner, citing certain difficulties, failed to submit objections. If the ex parte assessment is not set aside, the petitioner would be put to serious monetary loss. 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

5.

In view of the above, this Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned assessment

order

dated

22.08.

2024

bearing

No.

GSTIN 33AAXCS3278A1Z6/2019-20 passed by the respondent is hereby set aside. The petitioner is permitted to file objections within a period of thirty (30) days from today. If such objections are filed within the said period, the respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a further period of thirty (30) days thereafter.

6.

It is made clear that if the petitioner fails to file objections within the stipulated time, the respondent shall be at liberty to proceed further in accordance with law.

7.

There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 10.04.2026 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No NCC : Yes/No sji To The State Tax Officer, Nagercoil-1, Mead Street, Nagercoil 629 001 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR, J. sji and W.M.P(MD)No.8107 of 2026 10.04.2026 4/4 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.