M/S Rajapalayam Steel Company vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)- Ii (Audit Wing)
Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Rajapalayam Steel Company, filed a writ petition challenging an ex-parte assessment order dated 31.08.2023, passed by the 2nd respondent (Assistant Commissioner (ST) (Assessment Wing)) under Section 73 of the GST Act for the financial year 2018-19. The petitioner contended that for the same financial year and the same defect, a fresh notice was issued on 20.03.2023. Subsequently, the petitioner remitted the tax on 15.03.2024, leading the authorities to drop further proceedings by an order dated 27.04.2024. The petitioner argued that initiating two separate proceedings for the same assessment year and defect was illegal and arbitrary, violating principles of natural justice.
Held
The Court held that initiating two separate proceedings for the same assessment year and the same defect is impermissible. The Court noted that while technically the first order should be enforced and subsequent proceedings quashed, in this instance, the authorities themselves had chosen to drop the proceedings following the petitioner's remittance of tax. Consequently, the Court found the first ex-parte assessment order to be unsustainable. The impugned order was quashed, and the Writ Petition was allowed. The operative direction was the quashing of the impugned order and allowing the writ petition. No costs were awarded.
Key Issues
1. Whether the initiation of two separate proceedings under the GST Act for the same financial year and the same defect is legally permissible? (Question of law, relying on principles of natural justice and administrative law). Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the initiation of two separate proceedings for the same assessment year (2018-19) and the same defect was illegal, arbitrary, and a violation of natural justice. They contended that it is well-settled that there cannot be duplication of proceedings. The petitioner relied on the principle that once proceedings are initiated and then dropped due to subsequent compliance, a prior ex-parte order for the same issue should become unsustainable. Revenue's arguments: The judgment records no specific arguments from the respondents.
Sections Cited
Section 73
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 31.10.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN W.P(MD)No.30954 of 2025 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.24163 & 24165 of 2025 M/s.Rajapalayam Steel Company, Rep. by its Partner Mr.J.Siddique, No.19A, T.P.Mills Road, Rajapalayam-626 117. ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Assistant Commissioner (ST-II) (Audit Wing) Integrated Commercial Taxes Building, Rajapalayam-626 117. 2.The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (Assessment Wing) Tamil Nadu Commercial Taxes Department, Rajapalayam 2 Assessment Circle, Sivakasi, Virudhunagar.
... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records relating to the impugned order of assessment bearing Ref No.ZD330823182157A dated 31.08.2023 passed by the 2nd respondent under the provisions of Section 73 of the Act in GST DRC -07 for the Financial year 2018 -19 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary, violation of natural Justice 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis For Petitioner :Mr.K.
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.