Madras High Court
WP/41054/2026 of IND-KOROSHO EXIM Vs THE STATE TAX OFFICER (ST) on 14 October 2026
WP No. 41054 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 14-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
WP No. 41054 of 2026
CNR:{HCMA012227742026}
AND
WMP NO. 46050 OF 2026,WMP NO. 46051 OF 2026
Ind-korosho Exim
Represented by its partner MRS.Chitra
Muthukumar, 110/3, Panapakkam Main Road, Pudupet, Cuddalore, Tamil Nadu - 607108.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
The State Tax Officer (st)
Panruti (Town) Assessment Circle,Office of the State Tax Officer,Commercial Taxes Building,Kumbakonam Road, Near Taluk Office,Panruti - 607106, Cuddalore District.
..Respondent(s)
Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the respondent herein in impugned order in FORM GST DRC-07 bearing Reference No.ZD3305240324200 dated 06.05.2024 for the financial year 2019-2020 and quash the same in so far as it imposes general penalty of Rs.50,000 (CGST
Rs.25000 plus SGST Rs.25000) under section 125 of the tamilnadu goods and service tax act, 2017 as illegal , arbitrary, without jurisdiction and constrary to the binding pronouncements of this hon'ble court and consequently direct the respondent to withdraw the said sum from the electronic liability register of the petitioner and to refrain from recovering the same and thus render justice.
WP No. 41054 of 2026
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.S.Satheesh Kumar
for MR.T.Suresh
For Respondent(s):
Mr.I.Dinesh, Additional Government Pleader (Taxes)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Order
The present Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order in Form GST DRC-07 dated 06.05.2024.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, owing to the delay in filing the annual return in Form GSTR-9, both late fee and penalty have been levied. Since the late fee has already been levied under Section 47 of the Act for the delay in filing the annual return, the question of imposing a separate penalty would not arise.
3. The learned counsel would further submit that on the similar issue, this Court, in Tvl.Jainsons Castors & Industrial Products vs. The Assistant Commissioner (ST) Chennai (2025(2) TMI 1000), has held that the respondent authority can levy only late fee and not penalty. The said issue is also considered by this Court in M/s.Kandan Hardware Mart vs. The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC) Chennai (2026 (1) TMI 383), wherein it has been
WP No. 41054 of 2026
held that the question of imposing “General Penalty” under Section 125 of the respective GST Enactments cannot be countenanced in view of the reasons that “General Penalty” under Section 125 of the respective Enactments can be imposed only in the absence of “any other penalty” under Section 125 of the respective Enactments.
4. Mr. I. Dinesh, learned Additional Government Pleader (T), appearing for the respondent, would fairly submit that the issue is already covered by the order passed by this Court.
5. Considering the submissions made on either side, this Court is of the view that the issue involved in the present case is covered by the order passed by this Court in the aforementioned case. In view of the specific provision under Section 47 of the GST Act for the levy of late fee for the delayed filing of the annual return in Form GSTR-9, the imposition of a separate penalty under Section 125 of the Act is not warranted in the present case. Therefore, the penalty proceedings initiated by the respondent, cannot be sustained and are liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside solely with respect to the penalty proceedings, while the late fee imposed under Section 47 stands confirmed. The petitioner is directed to pay the said late fee within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, if not paid.
WP No. 41054 of 2026
6. With the above observation and direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. W.M.P.No.46050 of 2026 is ordered and WMP.No.46051/2026 is closed. 14-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No SK To The State Tax Officer (st) Panruti (Town) Assessment Circle,Office of the State Tax Officer,Commercial Taxes Building,Kumbakonam Road, Near Taluk Office,Panruti - 607106, Cuddalore District.
WP No. 41054 of 2026
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY J. SK WP No. 41054 of 2026 AND WMP NO. 46050 OF 2026,WMP NO. 46051 OF 2026 14-10-2026