High Court · 2025

WP No. 31450 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 20-08-2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMYWP No. 31450 of 2025ANDWMP NO. 35215 OF 2025,WMP NO. 35214 OF 2025,WMP NO. 35204 OF 2025,WP NO. 31456 OF 2025,WMP NO. 35200 OF 2025Banana Brandworks Private Limited, Represented by its Director, Mufadhal AliNo. 10, Second Floor, 2nd Street, Dr. Radha Krishnan Salai, Chennai, Tamil Nadu-600 004.Petitioner(s)Vs1.The Assistant Commissioner, Valluvarkottam Central - III Assessment Circle,Chennai Central, Tamil Nadu-600 034.2.Deputy Commissioner (ST)(GST Appeal I),PAPJM Building, Greams Road, 2nd Floor, Chennai.Respondentsin W.P.No.31450 of 2025 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 31450 of 20251.Deputy Commissioner (ST)(GST Appeal I),PAPJM Building, Greams Road, 2nd Floor, Chennai.2.The Assistant Commissioner, Valluvarkottam Central - III Assessment Circle,Chennai Central, Tamil Nadu-600 034. Respondents in W.P.No.31456 of 2025PRAYER in WP No. 31450 of 2025:- Writ Petition filed under article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for an issuance of Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records in GSTIN No- 33AAECB4659F1ZT/2018-19 on the files of the First Respondent and quash the impugned order dated 24-04-2024 with the reference no. ZD330424188568Z for the FY 2018-19 as arbitrary.PRAYER in WP No. 31456 of 2025:- Writ Petition filed under article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for an issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records in GSTIN No. 33AAECB4659F1ZT/2018-19 on the files of the First Respondent, quashing the impugned appeal rejection order dated 07-05-2025 with the reference ZD330525044912H for the FY 2018-19, and further directing the First Respondent to entertain the appeal filed by the Petitioner vide Form APL-01 dated 27-11-2024 on merits. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 31450 of 2025In both W.PsFor Petitioner(s):Mr.Suryaa RFor Respondent(s):Mrs.K.Vasanthamala, Government Advocate (t)COMMON ORDER W.P.No.31450 of 2025 has been filed by the petitioner challenging the impugned assessment order dated 24.04.2024 passed by the Assistant Commissioner/Assessing Officer, relating to the Financial Year 2018-19. W.P.No.31456 of 2025 has been filed by the petitioner challenging the impugned appeal rejection order dated 07.05.2025, passed by the Deputy Commissioner/Appellate Authority, relating to the Financial Year 2018-19.2.Mrs.K.Vasanthamala, learned Government Advocate (Taxes), takes notice on behalf of the respondents. 3.By consent of the parties, the main writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 31450 of 20254.Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that, in the present case, the petitioner have not received any physical copy of the show cause notice and also personal hearing notice. The show cause notice dated 26.12.2023 was uploaded in the GST Portal tab in “Additional Notices Column” and the petitioner had no ocassion to open the GST Portal. Even the impugned assessment order dated 24.04.2024 was also uploaded in the GST portal tab in “Additional Notices Column”, which is violation of principle of natural justice. He would further submit that the petitioner after knowing about the impugned assessment order being passed by the Assistant Commissioner/Assessing Officer, had preferred an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner/Appellate Authority by paying 10% statutory deposit of the disputed tax demand. However, the appeal got rejected on the ground of limitation vide order dated 07.05.2025. Hence, the petitioner is ready and willing to pay another 15% of the disputed tax demand in respect of the impugned assessment period and prayed to set aside the impugned orders with a directions to permit the petitioner to file their reply before the Assisstant Commissioner/Assessing Officer and provide https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 31450 of 2025an opportunity of personal hearing so that the petitioner would be able to substantiate their case. 5.Learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents would submit that as per the voluntary submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, subject to the deposit of 15% of the disputed tax demand in addition to the 10% deposit already being made by the petitioner in respect of the impugned assessment period, if the Court feels it appropriate and it is a fit case for re-consideration, this Court may consider and pass orders.6.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents and perused the materials available on record. 7.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 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 31450 of 2025petitioner, 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. 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 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 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 31450 of 2025achieve the object of the GST Act. 8.Thus, in such circumstances, this Court is of the view that the impugned assssment order dated 24.04.2024 came to be passed without affording opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner to establish their case, thereby violating the principles of natural justice and that it is just and necessary to provide an opportunity to the petitioner to establish their case on merits and in accordance with law. 9.For the reasons stated above, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned assessment order dated 24.04.2024 and the impugned appeal rejection order dated 07.05.2025. Accordingly, this Court pass the following orders:- (i) The orders impugned herein are set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Assistant Commissioner/Assessing Officer for fresh consideration on condition that the petitioner deposits 15% of the disputed tax amount in respect of the impugned assessment period in https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 31450 of 2025addition to the 10% deposit already made, as agreed by the petitioner, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.(ii) The petitioner shall file their reply/objection along with the required documents, if any, within a period of two weeks thereafter.(iii) On filing of such reply/objection by the petitioner, the Assistant Commissioner shall consider the same and issue a 14 days clear notice by fixing the date of personal hearing to the petitioner and thereafter, pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, after hearing the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible. 10.With the above directions, these writ petitions are disposed of. There is no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.20-08-2025rstIndex:Yes/NoSpeaking/Non-speaking orderInternet:YesNeutral Citation:Yes/No https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 31450 of 2025To1.The Assistant Commissioner, Valluvarkottam Central III Assessment CircleChennai Central, Tamil Nadu-600 0342.Deputy Commissioner (ST)(GST Appeal I)PAPJM Building, Greams Road, 2nd Floor, Chennai. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 31450 of 2025KRISHNAN RAMASAMY J.rstWP No. 31450 of 2025AND WP NO. 31456 OF 202520-08-2025