Tvl.V.V.Amman Store vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1

Facts

The petitioner, Tvl.V.V.Amman Store, represented by its Proprietor C.Rathinavelpandian, filed a writ petition challenging an Assessment Order dated 23.12.2025, passed by the Deputy State Tax Officer - 1, Thiruparankundram Assessment Circle, Madurai. This order was issued under Section 73 of the GST enactment for the assessment year 2021-22, following a Show Cause Notice dated 12.09.2025. The petitioner contended that the order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. The petitioner had not availed the opportunity for a personal hearing offered in the Show Cause Notice. The writ petition was filed on 23.09.2026, after the limitation period for filing an appeal under Section 107 of the GST enactments had expired. The petitioner offered to pre-deposit 25% of the disputed tax demand.

Held

The Court quashed the impugned Assessment Order dated 23.12.2025. The case was remitted back to the respondent for a fresh adjudication. This was made conditional upon the petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax in cash from their Electronic Cash Register within thirty days of receiving a copy of the order. The petitioner was also directed to file a reply to the Show Cause Notice dated 12.09.2025, along with supporting documents, within the same period, treating the impugned order as an addendum to the show cause notice. If these conditions were met, the respondent was to pass a final order on merits expeditiously, preferably within three months of receiving the reply and pre-deposit. The attachment of the petitioner's bank account was to be automatically vacated upon compliance. The Court clarified that if the petitioner failed to comply with any stipulation, the respondent could proceed to recover the tax as if the writ petition was dismissed. The respondent was also directed to provide due notice before passing any further order. The issue of whether the petitioner had a valid ground to approach the High Court directly after the expiry of the appeal period was implicitly addressed by the Court's decision to grant relief subject to conditions.

Key Issues

1. Whether the impugned Assessment Order dated 23.12.2025, passed by the respondent under Section 73 of the GST enactment, is liable to be quashed for gross violation of the Principles of Natural Justice, as argued by the petitioner? 2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a fresh adjudication after providing an opportunity for a personal hearing, subject to certain conditions, as prayed for by the petitioner? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the impugned order was passed in gross violation of the Principles of Natural Justice and sought to quash it, requesting a fresh assessment with a personal hearing. The petitioner also agreed to pre-deposit 25% of the disputed tax demand as a condition for de novo adjudication. Revenue's Contention: The judgment records that the learned Government Advocate (Taxes) took notice for the respondent. No specific arguments were recorded for the revenue in the provided text.