Tvl Raguram Transport vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer
Held
The Court acknowledged that the petitioner suffered an ex-parte order. While the appeal period had expired, the Court permitted the petitioner to file an appeal within thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. This appeal is to be entertained without reference to limitation. As a condition for this concession, the petitioner is required to pay 10% of the disputed tax amount as pre-deposit. Upon compliance with this pre-deposit and filing of the appeal, the attachment made in the petitioner's bank account shall be lifted forthwith. The Court also stipulated that if the petitioner fails to remit the pre-deposit or file the appeal within the specified thirty days, the benefits granted by this order will stand automatically recalled. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided, but the primary relief granted was conditional permission to appeal.
Facts
The petitioner, Tvl.Raguram Transport, represented by its Proprietor Ramanujam Hariharan, filed a writ petition challenging an ex-parte order dated 27.08.2024, passed by the Deputy State Tax Officer-2, Madurai, under Section 73 of the GST Act. The petitioner contended that the order was passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice. The appeal period for the impugned order had expired. The petitioner sought to quash the order and requested a fresh assessment with an opportunity for a personal hearing. The respondents are the Deputy State Tax Officer-2, the Deputy Commissioner(S.T.), and the Branch Manager of Axis Bank, where the petitioner's bank account was attached.
Key Issues
1. Whether the ex-parte order passed by the first respondent under Section 73 of the CGST Act, 2017, is illegal and in violation of the principles of natural justice? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the order was passed ex-parte, violating the principles of natural justice by denying them an opportunity for a personal hearing. They sought to quash the order and have a fresh assessment done. Revenue's arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue or State (respondents 1 and 2).
Sections Cited
Section 73
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1 W.P.(MD)NO.34731 OF 2025 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 28.11.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN W.P.(MD)No.34731 of 2025 and W.M.P.(MD)No.27438 of 2025 Tvl.Raguram Transport, Rep. by its Proprietor Ramanujam Hariharan, 129, Thathanery Main Road, Thathanery, Madurai – 625 018. ... Petitioner Vs.
The Deputy State Tax Officer-2, Westveli Street Assessment Circle, Madurai.
The Deputy Commissioner(S.T.), Madurai (East), Madurai.
The Branch Manager, Axis Bank, Door No.4, Goods Shed Street, Madurai. ... Respondents Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for records pertaining to the impugned order under Section 73 passed by the first respondent vide order in GSTIN: 33AAZPH9308K2Z3/2019-20 dated 27.08.2024 and quash the same 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2 W.P.(MD)NO.34731 OF 2025 as it is illegal, and in gross violation of principles of natural justice and further direct the first respondent to re-do the assessment afresh after providing the petitioner
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.