WP/41691/2026 of Sathya , Proprietor M/S.Sathya Enterprises Vs The Deputy Commissioner on 12 October 2026

ORDER

The present Writ Petition has been filed challenging the assessment order in Form GST DRC-07, dated 03.01.2025 passed by the second respondent and the consequential impugned order in Form GST APL-02, dated 31.08.2026 passed by the first respondent on the ground that there was a delay of 564 days, which is beyond the condonable period.

2. Mr. I. Dinesh, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice on behalf of the respondents. By consent of the parties, the main Writ Petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner came to know about the impugned Order dated 03.01.2025 in Form GST DRC-07 passed by the second respondent under Section 74 of the TNGST Act, 2017, only when the bank account was attached on 26.06.2026. Being unaware of the said impugned order and ill health, the petitioner has failed to file their appeal within time. Thereafter, the appeal against the aforesaid assessment order was preferred by the petitioner with a delay of 564 days. Since the said delay is beyond the condonable period, the appeal was rejected by the first respondent, vide rejection order dated 31.08.2026.

4. Further, she would submit that the respondents have already recovered the entire disputed tax amount from the petitioner. Hence, she requests this Court to grant an opportunity to the petitioner to present their case before the respondents by setting aside the impugned orders.

5. On the other hand, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that the delay, in filing the appeal, has occurred only due to the fault on the part of the petitioner and requests this Court to pass appropriate orders.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents and also perused the materials available on record.

7. In the case on hand, the impugned order came to be passed on 03.01.2025. Aggrieved over the same, an appeal was belatedly preferred by the petitioner on 21.07.2026, i.e., with a delay of 564 days. Since the delay was beyond the condonnable period, the said appeal was rejected by the first respondent vide impugned order dated 31.08.2026. According to the petitioner, since she was under medical treatment, she remained unaware of the said order and were consequently unable to file the appeal within the prescribed time.

8. The above reason assigned by the petitioner, for the delay in filing the appeal against the assessment order, appears to be genuine. In such view of the matter, this Court is inclined to condone the delay, in filing the appeal against the impugned assessment order, on terms.

9. Further, it was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the respondent has already recovered entire amount of disputed tax amount from the petitioner. In such view of the matter, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order dated 28.11.2025 passed by the respondent. Accordingly, this Court passes the following order:-

(i) The impugned rejection order dated 31.08.2026 is set aside and the delay of 564 days in filing the appeal against the assessment order is hereby condoned.

ii) If the appeal filed by the petitioner was completely returned, the petitioner is directed to file a fresh appeal, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

iii) Thereafter, the first respondent/Appellate Authority is directed to take the appeal on record and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, after providing sufficient opportunity to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible. iv) Considering the fact that the impugned order itself has been set aside, this Court is of the opinion that the attachment made on the bank account of the petitioner cannot survive any longer and hence, it is to be lifted. As a sequel, upon production of a copy of this order, the Bank concerned is directed to de-freeze the bank account of the petitioner and permit the petitioner to operate their bank account.

10. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected WMP.No.46775/2026 is ordered and WMP.No.46782/2026 is closed. 12-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No SRM To

1. The Deputy Commissioner Kancheepuram Circle Tamilnadu

2. The Deputy State Tax Officer Poonamallee Assessment Circle Tamilnadu

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J. SRM WP No. 41691 of 2026 12-10-2026