Madras High Court
WP/39457/2026 of Shree Lakshmi Steels and Hardwares Vs State Tax Officer on 8 October 2026
WP No. 39457 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 08-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
WP No. 39457 of 2026
and WMP Nos.44338 and 44339 of 2026
CNR: {HCMA012230832026}
Shree Lakshmi Steels and Hardwares
Represented by its Partner
Subramani Prabakaran
1-4, Kottaimedu Kallankattuvalasu,
Komarapalayam,
Namakkal- 638183.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
The State Tax Officer,
Kumarapalayam Assessment Circle,
Thiruchengode Road, Namakkal 637 301.
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the impugned order bearing reference GSTIN 33ADGFS6052B1ZF/2017-18
dated 09.04.2026 along with its Summary in Form GST DRC-07 bearing reference ZD330426087570C dated 09.04.2026 issued by the respondent, to quash the same.
__________
( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 11:51:50 am )
WP No. 39457 of 2026
For Petitioner(s):
Ms. Disha Jain
For Respondent(s):
Ms. G. Dhanamadhri
Special Government Pleader (T)
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
This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the orders dated 09.04.2026 passed by the respondent.
2. Ms. G. Dhanamadhri, learned Special Government Pleader (T) takes notice on behalf of the respondent. 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 submits that, initially, proceedings were initiated against the petitioner, which were subsequently quashed by this Court vide order dated 18.03.2025 passed in W.P. No. 19886 of 2024, whereby the then impugned order dated 30.12.2023 was set aside. Pursuant to the said order, a fresh notice in Form GST DRC-01 and a show cause notice were issued and uploaded solely on the common portal, without serving any physical copy through RPAD. Since the petitioner was unaware of the said notice, they could not file their reply within the prescribed time. Under __________
( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 11:51:50 am )
WP No. 39457 of 2026 these circumstances, the impugned order was passed by the respondent in gross violation of the principles of natural justice, without providing any opportunity of a personal hearing to the petitioner. Hence, the present Writ Petition has been filed.
4. Further, she would submit that the petitioner is willing to pay 25% of the disputed tax amount to the respondent. To that effect, she has also made an endorsement in the Court bundle. Hence, she requests this Court to grant an opportunity to the petitioner to present their case before the respondent by setting aside the impugned order.
5. On the other hand, the learned Special Government Pleader (T) appearing for the respondent would submit that the respondent had uploaded the notices in the GST Online Portal. But the petitioner failed to avail the said opportunity. However, she fairly agreed that the matter may be remanded back to the respondent, subject to the petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax amount. __________
( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 11:51:50 am )
WP No. 39457 of 2026
6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader (T) for the respondent and also perused the materials available on record.
7. In the case on hand, it is evident that the show cause notice was uploaded on the GST Portal Tab. According to the petitioner, he was not aware of the issuance of the said show cause notice issued through the GST Portal and the original of the said show cause notice was not furnished to them. 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, confirming the proposals contained in the show cause notice.
8. No doubt, sending notice by uploading in portal is a sufficient service, but, the Officer who is sending the repeated reminders, despite the fact that there is 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 amount to fulfilling the empty formalities. Merely passing an ex parte order by fulfilling the empty formalities __________
( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 11:51:50 am )
WP No. 39457 of 2026 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.
9. 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. Therefore, this Court finds that there has been a lack of effort in applying the available opportunities to serve the notices/orders etc., effectively to the petitioner.
10. Further, it was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is willing to pay 25% of the disputed tax amount to the respondent. In such view of the matter, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned orders dated 09.04.2026 passed by the respondent. Accordingly, this Court passes the following order:-
(i) The impugned orders dated 09.04.2026 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the respondent for fresh consideration on condition that the petitioner shall pay 25% of __________
( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 11:51:50 am )
WP No. 39457 of 2026 disputed tax amount to the respondent within a period of four
(4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The setting aside of the impugned order will take effect from the date of payment of the said amount.
(ii) The petitioner shall file their reply/objection along with the required documents, if any, within a period of three weeks from the date of payment of amount as stated above.
(iii) On filing of such reply/objection by the petitioner, the respondent 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, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. W.M.P.No.44338 of 2026 filed to dispense with the production of the original impugned order dated 09.04.2026, is allowed. Consequently, the connected W.M.P.No.44339 of 2026 is also closed. 08-10-2026 Asi __________
( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 11:51:50 am )
WP No. 39457 of 2026 To The State Tax Officer, Kumarapalayam Assessment Circle, Thiruchengode Road, Namakkal 637 301. __________
( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 11:51:50 am )
WP No. 39457 of 2026 KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J. Asi WP No. 39457 of 2026 and WMP Nos.44338 and 44339 of 2026 08-10-2026 __________
( Uploaded on: 13/10/2026 11:51:50 am )