S.Arumugasamy vs. The Principal Secretary TO Government
Held
The Court acknowledged the petitioner's submission to restrict the prayer to seeking liberty to file an appeal. The Court granted the petitioner liberty to file a statutory appeal before the concerned respondent within four weeks from the date of receipt of the order. The Court directed that if such an appeal is filed, it shall be entertained without reference to the period of limitation, provided all other conditions for filing an appeal are met. The concerned respondent was directed to pass orders in accordance with law after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within four weeks thereafter. The Writ Petition was disposed of with these directions.
Facts
The petitioner, S. Arumugasamy, filed a writ petition challenging an Order in Original No. 01/AC/ST/2024 dated 26.07.2024 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, GST and Central Excise, Kovilpatti Division. The impugned order imposed a penalty. The petitioner also sought a direction for respondents 1 to 8 (Government of Tamil Nadu officials from various Public Works Departments) to pay the GST amount of Rs 42,86,806/- along with interest and other charges claimed by the 9th respondent. The petitioner later restricted his prayer to seeking liberty to file an appeal before the concerned respondent.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to challenge the Order in Original dated 26.07.2024 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, GST and Central Excise, Kovilpatti Division, before the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, particularly concerning the imposition of penalty? Petitioner's argument: The petitioner sought to quash the penalty imposed by the impugned order and direct the government respondents to pay the GST dues. Revenue/State's argument: The learned Additional Government Pleader for the official respondents submitted that if an appeal is filed, it would be considered and orders passed in accordance with law. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the GST respondent (9th respondent).
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 04.10.2024 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ W.P.(MD)No.23673 of 2024 and W.M.P.(MD)No.20048 of 2024 S.Arumugasamy ... Petitioner /Vs./ 1.The Principal Secretary to Government, Finance Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Fort St.George, Chennai 600 009. 2.The Principal Secretary to Government, Public Works Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Fort St.George, Chennai 600 009. 3.The Chief Engineer (Buildings), Public Works Department, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005. 4.The Executive Engineer, Building (C and M) Division, Public Works Department, No. 6, Service Road, GT Nagar, Virudhunagar 626 001. 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
The Assistant Executive Engineer, Building (C and M) Division, Public Works Department, No. 6, Service Road, GT Nagar, Virudhunagar-626 001 6.The Executive Engineer, Building (C and M) Medical Works, Public Works Department, Tirunelveli 627 011. 7.The Executive Engineer, Building (C and M) Division, Medical Works, Public Works Department, Sivagangai-630 562 8.Th
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.