High Court · 2025

W.P.No.13886 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 21.04.2025Coram The Honourable Mr.Justice Krishnan RamasamyW.P.No.13886 of 2025andW.M.P.No.15607 of 2025M/s.Aerotechrep. by its Partner Mr.Veerasekaran VeerappanGSTIN:33AAMFA6830G1ZLNo.14, Kalyani Industrial Estate,Vanagaram Road,Athipet, Chennai- 600 058. ...Petitioner Vs.The State Tax OfficerThiruverkadu assessment Circle,Integrated Commercial Taxes and Regn DepartmentBuilding, 571, Anna Salai, Nandanam,Chennai-600035. ...Respondent Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records in the file of the Impugned Ex-parte order issued by the respondent electronically in common portal vide FORM GST DRC-07 No.ZD330824244861A dated 27.08.2024 and to quash the same.For Petitioner: Ms.Akila S1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.13886 of 2025For Respondent : Mr.T.N.C.Kaushik Additional Government Pleader (Taxes) Order Mr.T.N.C.Kaushik, learned Additional Government Pleader (Taxes), takes notice on behalf of the respondent. With consent, the main Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself. 2. The challenge in this Writ Petition is to the order dated 27.08.2024 passed by the respondent for the AY 2019-20 and to quash the same.3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondent has issued a show cause notice dated 29.11.2023 followed by three reminders dated 13.07.2023, 12.08.2024 and 19.08.2024 by uploading the same in the GST portal without serving them through physical mode. Therefore, the petitioner was not aware of those notices and therefore failed to file reply. Since the petitioner failed to file reply to the said show cause notice, the respondent has confirmed the proposals contained in the show 2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.13886 of 2025cause notice and passed the present impugned order and the same was also uploaded in the GST portal. The petitioner came to know of the impugned order only after initiation of recovery proceedings by the respondent. Therefore, the learned counsel would submit that the impugned order suffers from violation of principles of natural justice and is liable to be aside, as the petitioner has not been heard before passing the impugned order. 3.1. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit 25% of the disputed tax, in the event, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order and remand the matter back to the Authority for fresh consideration. Hence, he prayed for appropriate directions.4. The learned Additional Government Pleader (Taxes) for the respondent fairly submitted that since the petitioner has voluntarily come forward to deposit 25% of the disputed tax, the prayer sought for by the petitioner may be considered. 3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.13886 of 20255. Considering the above submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and upon perusal of the materials, it is evident that the impugned show cause notice was uploaded on the GST Portal Tab. According to the petitioner, the petitioner was not aware of the issuance of the show cause notice issued through the GST Portal and the original of the said show cause notice was not furnished to them. In such circumstances, this Court is of the view that the impugned assessment order came to be passed without affording any opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, confirming the proposals contained in the show cause notice. 6. No doubt sending notice by uploading in portal is a sufficient service, but, the Officer who is sending the repeated reminders, inspite of the fact that no response from the petitioner to the show cause notices etc., the Officer should have applied his/her mind and explored the possibility of sending notices by way of other modes prescribed in Section 169 of the GST Act, which are also the valid mode of service under the Act, otherwise it will not be an effective service, rather, it would only fulfilling the empty formalities. Merely passing an ex parte order by fulfilling the empty formalities will not serve any useful purpose and the same will only pave 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.13886 of 2025way for multiplicity of litigations, not only wasting the time of the Officer concerned, but also the precious time of the Appellate Authority/Tribunal and this Court as well. Thus, when there is no response from the tax payer to the notice sent through a particular mode, the Officer who is issuing notices should strictly explore the possibilities of sending notices through some other mode as prescribed in Section 169(1) of the Act, preferably by way of RPAD, which would ultimately achieve the object of the GST Act.7. Therefore, this Court finds that there is a lack of opportunities being provided to serve the notices/orders etc., effectively to the petitioner. Hence, this Court is inclined to set-aside the impugned order with terms, by issuing the following directions:-i) The impugned order passed by the respondent dated 27.08.2024 is set aside. ii)Consequently, the matter is remanded to the respondent for 5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.13886 of 2025fresh consideration. iii) The petitioner is granted liberty to deposit 25% of the disputed tax, which the petitioner themselves had voluntarily came forward to make such payment, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. iv) Thereafter, the petitioner is directed to file a reply along with supportive documents within a period of two weeks. v) Thereupon, the first respondent is directed to consider the reply and shall issue a clear 14 days notice affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and shall decide the matter in accordance with law. vi) Considering the fact that the impugned order itself has been set aside, this Court is of the opinion that the attachment if any, made on the bank account of the Petitioner, cannot survive any longer and hence, it is lifted. As a sequel, the respondent is directed to instruct the concerned bank 6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.13886 of 2025to release the attachment on the bank account of the petitioner, immediately upon the production of proof with regard to the payment of 25% as stated above.8. With the above observations & directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. 21.04.2025(2/2)arrIndex : yes/noNeutral Citation : yes/noToThe State Tax OfficerThiruverkadu assessment Circle,Integrated Commercial Taxes and Regn DepartmentBuilding, 571, anna salai, nandanam,Chennai-600035.7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.13886 of 2025 Krishnan Ramasamy,J.,arrW.P.No.13886 of 2025 21.04.20258/8