M/S. Paramasivan Traders vs. Assistant Commissioner (State Tax)
Held
The Court held that the writ petition could be disposed of by quashing the impugned order on terms. The Court reasoned that the order had been passed without considering the petitioner's reply. The terms stipulated were that the petitioner must deposit 25% of the disputed tax in cash from the Electronic Cash Register within 30 days of receiving the order. Additionally, the petitioner was directed to file a reply to the show cause notice, with the impugned order treated as an addendum to the show cause notice. The respondent was directed to pass a fresh order on merits expeditiously after hearing the petitioner. The Court made it clear that failure to comply with these conditions would result in the writ petition being deemed dismissed, allowing the respondent to recover the amount. No issue was expressly left undecided.
Facts
The petitioner, M/s. Paramasivan Traders, represented by its Proprietor P. Muthukumar, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 17.02.2025 passed by the Assistant Commissioner (State Tax), Tenkasi Assessment Circle, for the assessment year 2020-21. The petitioner contended that the order was passed without considering their reply and that they failed to participate in the proceedings before the respondent. The petitioner offered to deposit 25% of the disputed tax. The respondent is the Assistant Commissioner (State Tax). The dispute pertains to the assessment year 2020-21.
Key Issues
1. Whether the impugned order dated 17.02.2025, passed by the Assistant Commissioner (State Tax), is liable to be quashed as illegal, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction, for not considering the petitioner's reply and for not affording sufficient opportunity? (Question of law and fact, turning on principles of natural justice and procedural fairness under GST law). Contentions: Petitioner: Argued that the order was passed without considering their reply and that they were not afforded sufficient opportunity. They offered to deposit 25% of the disputed tax. Respondent: The respondent, through the learned Additional Government Pleader, took notice. No specific arguments were recorded for the respondent in the judgment.
Sections Cited
None explicitly mentioned in the judgment text provided.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 14.07.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN and W.M.P(MD)No.14527 of 2025 M/s. Paramasivan Traders, GSTIN 33BTEPM8135L1ZF, Represented by its Proprietor P. Muthukumar, 8/104-2, Avudaysivanpatti Street, Avudayanur, Tenkasi Taluk, Tirunelveli - 627808. ... Petitioner Vs.
Assistant Commissioner (State Tax), Tenkasi Assessment Circle, C T Buildings, Tenkasi - 627 811. ...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 the records on the file of the respondent in GSTIN 33BTEPM8135L1ZF/2020-21 dated 17.02.2025 for the assessment year 2020-21 and to quash the same as illegal, arbitrary, wholly without jurisdiction, and direct the respondent to issue notice to the petitioner then pass an assessment order afresh after affording an sufficient opportunity within such time as may be directed by this Court. 1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis For 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.