M/S Babu Stores vs. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner
Facts
The petitioner, M/s.Babu Stores, filed a writ petition before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court challenging an order dated 26.02.2025 passed by the second respondent, the State Tax Officer. This order was preceded by a notice in DRC 01A and an intimation in DRC 01, both dated 25.11.2024. The petitioner had submitted a reply to the show cause notice on 05.02.2025. The impugned order indicated that the petitioner's reply had been considered before its issuance. The writ petition was taken up for final disposal at the admission stage with the consent of both parties.
Held
The Court held that the writ petition was not maintainable because the petitioner had an alternate statutory remedy. The Court noted that the impugned order indicated that the petitioner's reply had been considered before its issuance, meaning there was no procedural bar to filing an appeal. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ petition but granted the petitioner liberty to file a statutory appeal within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The Court directed the appellate authority to consider the appeal on its merits and to hear the petitioner before passing a final order. The petitioner was also directed to comply with the mandatory pre-deposit requirements under Section 107 of the TNGST Act/CGST Act, 2017. No issue was expressly left undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the writ petition is maintainable when the petitioner has an alternate statutory remedy of appeal? The petitioner contended that the impugned order was passed without proper consideration of their reply and that the proceedings were vitiated. The petitioner sought to quash the order. The respondent, represented by the Additional Government Pleader, argued that the petitioner had an alternate remedy of filing a statutory appeal against the impugned order. The respondent implicitly argued that the writ petition should not be entertained due to the availability of this alternative remedy.
Sections Cited
Section 107
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: and
By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up f
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.