Tvl. Ramalakshmi Construction vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer (St) Ii
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 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. This appeal was to be entertained without reference to the limitation period. However, as a condition for this concession, the petitioner was required to pay 10% of the disputed tax amount as pre-deposit. The Court specified that if the petitioner failed to remit the pre-deposit amount or file the appeal within four weeks, the benefit of this order would stand automatically recalled. The Court did not explicitly decide on the legality or jurisdiction of the original order but provided a procedural remedy.
Facts
The petitioner, Tvl.Ramalakshmi Construction, represented by its Proprietor, filed a writ petition before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court. The petitioner challenged an ex-parte order passed by the Respondent, The Deputy State Tax Officer (ST)-II, Srivilliputhur Assessment Circle, on 23.06.2025, with Case ID No. 33DWYPR5872L1ZC/2024-25. The petitioner sought to quash this order, alleging it was illegal, without jurisdiction, and in gross violation of the principles of natural justice. The petitioner also prayed for a direction to the Respondent to re-do the assessment afresh after providing an opportunity for a personal hearing as per the GST Act provisions. The appeal period for the impugned order had already expired.
Key Issues
1. Whether the ex-parte order passed by the Respondent is liable to be quashed for being illegal, without jurisdiction, and in violation of the principles of natural justice, as argued by the Petitioner? The Petitioner contended that the order was passed ex-parte, violating the principles of natural justice, and sought a fresh assessment with a personal hearing. The Respondent did not record any specific arguments in the judgment. 2. Whether the Petitioner should be granted permission to file an appeal beyond the prescribed limitation period, and if so, under what conditions? The Petitioner sought to challenge the order, and the Court considered the possibility of allowing a delayed appeal.
Sections Cited
Article 226
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 20.11.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN & W.M.P.(MD)No.26237 of 2025 Tvl.Ramalakshmi Construction, Represented by its Proprietor, Thiru.Ramalakshmi, 1/327, South Street, Vendurayapuram, Sivakasi, Virudhunagar District 626 141. ... Petitioner Vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer (ST)-II, Srivilliputhur Assessment Circle, Commercial Tax Office, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District. ... Respondent
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the Respondent vide his proceedings in DRC-07, Case ID No.33DWYPR5872L1ZC/ 2024-25, dated 23.06.2025 and quash the same as it is illegal, without jurisdiction and in gross violation of Principles of Natural Justice and further direct the Respondent to re-do the assessment afresh after providing petitioner an opportunity of Personal Hearing as per the provisions of the GST Act. 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.i
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.