Madras High Court
WP/38163/2026 of S V ENGINEERING Vs THE DEPUTY STATE TAX OFFICER-1 on 7 October 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 07-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
WP No. 38163 & 38169 of 2026
CNR:{HCMA012125922026}
AND
WMP NO. 42873 & 42870 OF 2026
S V Engineering
Rep by its Proprietor, Venkatesan,
Old No.48, New No.4, Anna Street,
Srinivasa Nagar, Chennai - 600050.
..Petitioner(s) in both
petition
Vs
The Deputy State Tax Officer-1
Padi Assessment Circle,
Room No.202, 2nd Floor,
Integrated Commercial Taxes Building,
Nazarathpet, Poonamallee,
Chennai- 123.
..Respondent(s) in both
petition
Common Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, Calling for the records relating to the Impugned Order passed by the Respondent in Form GST DRC-07 bearing Ref. No. ZD330426169270J
dated 20.04.2026, pertaining to the Financial Year 2023-2024, under Section 74
of the CGST / TNGST Acts, 2017, and quash the same, and consequently direct the Respondent to reconsider the matter afresh after providing a fair and reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and permitting the Petitioner to submit all supporting documents
Calling for the records relating to the Impugned Order passed by the Respondent in Form GST DRC-07 vide Reference . No. ZD330426169030R
for the Financial Year 2022- 2023 dated 20.04.2026, under Section 74 of the CGST / TNGST Acts, 2017, and quash the same, and consequently direct the Respondent to reconsider the matter afresh after providing a fair and reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and permitting the Petitioner to submit all supporting documents For Petitioner(s):
Mr.S.Satheesh Kumar, for Mr.T.Suresh
For Respondent(s):
Mr.B.Sivaraman, GA
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.
Common Order
These writ petitions have been filed challenging the orders dated 20.04.2026 passed by the respondent.
2. Mr.B.Sivaraman, learned Government Advocate, takes notice on behalf of the respondent.
3. By consent of the parties, the main writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in these cases, all notices/communications were uploaded by the respondent in the GST
common portal. Since the petitioner had failed to view the portal, they were not aware of the said notices, due to which, they failed to file their reply within the time. Under these circumstances, the impugned orders came to be passed by the respondent without providing any opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. Hence, these petitions have been filed.
5. Further, he would submit that the petitioner has already paid the entire disputed tax amount to the respondent. Hence, he requests this Court to grant an opportunity to the petitioner to present their case before the respondent by setting aside the impugned orders.
6. On the other hand, the learned counsel 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. Further, she has fairly admitted that no opportunity of personal hearing was provided to the petitioner prior to the passing of impugned orders. Therefore, she requested this Court to remit the matter back to the respondent.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent and also perused the materials available on record.
8. In the cases 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.
9. 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 no response from the petitioner to the show cause notices etc., 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 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.
10. 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 lack of efforts in exploring the available opportunities to serve the notices/orders etc., effectively on the petitioner.
11. Further, it was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has already paid the entire disputed tax amount to the respondent. In such view of the matter, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned orders dated 20.04.2026 passed by the respondent. Accordingly, this Court passes the following order:-
(i) The impugned orders dated 20.04.2026 are set aside and the matters are remanded to the respondent for fresh consideration.
(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 receipt of a copy of this order.
(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.
12. With the above directions, these writ petitions are disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed. 07-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No nsa To The Deputy State Tax Officer-1 Padi Assessment Circle, Room No.202, 2nd Floor, Integrated Commercial Taxes Building, Nazarathpet, Poonamallee, Chennai- 123.
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY J. nsa WP No. 38163 & 38169 of 2026 07-10-2026