Tvl. Mehta Traders vs. The Proper Officer
Facts
The petitioner, Tvl. Mehta Traders from Surat, Gujarat, is challenging an order passed by the Proper Officer, Deputy State Tax Officer (INT), Roving Squad, Virudhunagar, on June 26, 2024. This order, issued under Section 129 of the CGST Act, 2017 read with the IGST Act, imposed a penalty on the petitioner. The petitioner intended to file an appeal against this order but faced difficulties as the appeal was returned due to incorrect addressing. The petitioner sought permission from the High Court to represent the appeal before the jurisdictional Appellate Authority, the Deputy Commissioner (ST)(Appeals), Virudhunagar.
Held
The Court held that the petitioner should be granted liberty to represent their appeal before the jurisdictional Appellate Authority, the Deputy Commissioner (ST)(Appeals), Virudhunagar, who was suo motu impleaded as the second respondent. The Court directed that if the appeal is filed within thirty days from the date of the order, the Appellate Authority shall dispose of the appeal on its merits without considering the delay. The petitioner would be heard before final orders are passed by the Appellate Authority. The Court disposed of the writ petition with these observations and closed the connected miscellaneous petitions.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner should be granted liberty to file an appeal before the jurisdictional Appellate Authority, despite the initial appeal being returned due to incorrect addressing? The petitioner argued that they encountered procedural difficulties in filing their appeal due to the appeal being returned. They contended that they would be satisfied if permitted to represent the appeal before the correct jurisdictional Appellate Authority. The revenue, through the Government Advocate (Taxes), stated they had no objection to disposing of the writ petition on merits, subject to prescribed terms. The court did not record any specific arguments from the revenue regarding the merits of the penalty order itself, focusing instead on the procedural aspect of filing the appeal.
Sections Cited
Section 129
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 01-10-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C. SARAVANAN and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.21590 & 21591 of 2026 CNR:{HCMD011404242026} Tvl. Mehta Traders Rep. by its Proprietor Kamlesh Bhupatrai Mehta ..Petitioner(s) Vs
The Proper officer Deputy State Tax Officer (INT), Roving Squad, Commercial Taxes Buildings, Virudhunagar.
The Deputy Commissioner (ST)(Appeals), Commercial Tax Buildings, Madurai Road, Virudhunagar. (R2 is suo motu impleaded vide order dated 01.10.2026 in W.P.(MD) No.28448 of 2026) ..Respondent(s) 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, relating to the impugned order passed by the respondent in Form GSTMOV-09, O.R.No.121/2024-25/Roving Squad, Virudhunagar int., dated 26.06.2024 under Section 129 of the CGST Act, 2017 read with the IGST Act, and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law, and consequently direct the respondent to refund the amount paid/recovered pursuant to the impugned order, together with applicable interest. __
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.