High Court · 2025

W.P.No.29060 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 05.08.2025Coram The Honourable Mr.Justice Krishnan RamasamyW.P.No.29060 of 2025 andW.M.P.Nos.32599 & 32602 of 2025Ms Sons Dyers Rep by its PartnerMr.K.M.Mohamed Yousuf FaizeeNo 5, 4th Floor Armenian Street,Mannady,Chennai, T.N. 600 001. ..Petitioner Vs.ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST)OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST)LOANSQUARE, ASSESSMENT CIRLE,NORTH I CHENNAI NORTH INTEGRATED COMMERCIAL TAX BUILDING CHENNAI NORTH DIVISION, No.32,Elephant Gate Bridge Road, (Walltax Road) Vepery, Chennai – 600 003. ...Respondent Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for records of the Impugned Order Ref-NoZD331223215628M dated 27.12.2023 passed by the Respondent and to quash the said Impugned Order and consequently, to direct the Respondent to provide the Petitioner an opportunity of fresh hearing and pass orders. 1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.29060 of 2025For Petitioner: Mr.G.Inbaraj For Respondent : Ms.P.Selvi Government Advocate (T) Order Heard Mr.G.Inbaraj learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Ms.P.Selvi, learned Government Advocate (T), who 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 passed by the respondent dated 27.12.2023 and to quash the same and consequently, to direct the respondent to provide an opportunity of fresh hearing. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the petitioner was unaware of any of the proceedings initiated against the petitioner, inasmuch as, none of the communications/show cause notice/personal hearing notice/reminder notices were served on the petitioner directly through physical mode of service but made it available 2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.29060 of 2025only on the GST Portal, hence, the petitioner failed to file reply and respond to such notices, however, the respondent without even hearing the petitioner, passed the impugned order. 3.1 The learned counsel contended that the impugned order suffers from violation of principles of natural justice, as the petitioner has not been heard before passing the impugned order and is liable to be set aside. However, it is stated that the petitioner is also ready and willing to deposit 25% of the disputed tax, in the event, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order and remands the matter back to the Authority for fresh consideration, and thus, prays for appropriate orders. 4. The learned Government Advocate (T) 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.29060 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 in the GST common Portal Tab'. According to the petitioner, the petitioner was not aware of the issuance of the show cause notice/reminders. Further, the original of the said show cause notice was not furnished to the petitioner in person. 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. 5.1 No doubt, sending notice by uploading in portal is a sufficient service, but, the Officer who finds no response from the petitioner to the show cause notice, 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, the service of notice will not be deemed to 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 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.29060 of 2025any useful purpose and the same would pave way 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.6. Therefore, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order, as the same suffers from the violation of principles of natural justice. Thus, once the order is passed in violation of principles of natural justice, this Court cannot impose any condition requiring the petitioner to make any deposit, however, considering the fact that the petitioner has come forward to deposit 25% of the disputed tax in the event the impugned order is set aside, to which course, the learned Government Advocate (T) is also agreable, this Court is inclined to pass/issue the following orders/directions:-5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.29060 of 2025i) The impugned order passed by the respondent dated 27.12.2023 is set aside. ii)Consequently, the matter is remanded to the respondent for fresh consideration. iii) The petitioner is granted liberty to deposit 25% of the disputed tax, which the petitioner themselves have 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 respondent is directed to consider the reply and shall issue a 14 clear days notice affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and shall decide the matter in accordance with law.7. In the result, the Writ Petition is allowed on the aforesaid terms. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. 05.08.2025 sdIndex : yes/noNeutral Citation : yes/no6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.29060 of 2025ToASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST)OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ST)LOANSQUARE, ASSESSMENT CIRLE,NORTH I CHENNAI NORTH INTEGRATED COMMERCIAL TAX BUILDING CHENNAI NORTH DIVISION, No.32,Elephant Gate Bridge Road, (Walltax Road) Vepery, Chennai – 600 003. 7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.29060 of 2025 Krishnan Ramasamy,J.,sdW.P.No.29060 of 2025 05.08.20258/8