Authority: Madras High Court, Justice Senthilkumur Ramamoorthy

Order Date: 15 July 2026

Case Overview

  • Parties: Petitioner S Murugaayi Ammal and Co (GSTIN 33AARFS9242H1ZS), represented by V.S. Lokesh Kumar; Respondents: Assistant Commissioner ST FAC Royapuram Assessment Circle and Deputy Commissioner GST Chennai North Division; Government Counsel (Tax) R. Sethu Prabakaran.
  • Nature of Proceeding: Writ petition (WP No. 25582 of 2026 and W.M.P.Nos.27917 & 27919 of 2026) filed under Article 226 challenging an impugned GST order dated 29‑01‑2025 (Reference No. ZD33012527909G) issued without hearing the petitioner. The petition was filed after the statutory limitation period had expired.
  • Observations & Reasoning: The Court observed that the impugned order was passed without affording the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of hearing, rendering the order procedurally infirm. Although the petition was time‑barred, the petitioner consented to remit 25 % of the disputed tax demand as a condition for remand. An endorsement to this effect was recorded in the case bundle.
  • Directions:

1. The petitioner must remit 25 % of the disputed tax demand within thirty (30) days from receipt of a copy of this order.

2. Subject to the above remittance, the impugned order dated 29‑01‑2025 is set aside and the matter is remanded for fresh consideration.

3. The Respondents are directed to provide the petitioner a reasonable opportunity of hearing and to issue a fresh order within three (3) months of receipt of the 25 % remittance.

4. No order as to costs shall be made.

5. All connected miscellaneous writ petitions are hereby closed.

Final Outcome

The High Court quashes the original GST order, remands the case for reconsideration conditioned upon the petitioner’s payment of 25 % of the disputed tax demand within the stipulated period, and mandates issuance of a fresh order within three months thereafter. No costs are awarded, and related writ petitions are closed.

Topics: GST, Court Order