Madras High Court
WP/39692/2026 of P Senthamaraikannan Vs The State Tax Officer 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. 39692, 39686 & 39683 of 2026
CNR:{HCMA012209932026}
P Senthamaraikannan
Proprietor of Tvl. Jayashree Steels,
No.5/19, Phase I, Dwaraka Nagar,
Manali New Town, Chennai
..Petitioner(s) in all
petitions
Vs
1. The State Tax Officer
Cholavaram Assesment Circle,
Integrated C.T. Complex,
Chennai North Division,
No.32, I Floor,Elephant Gate Bridge Road, Chennai 600 003
2. The Assistant Commissioner ST
Cholavaram Assessment Circle,
Integrated Buildings for Commercial Taxes, No.32, Elephant Gate Bridge Road, Off Wall Tax Road Vepery, Chennai
..Respondent(s) in all
petitions
Common Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to impugned Order Ref.No. GSTIN
33EVIPS1618P1Z0/18-19 dated 15.07.2021 along with its summary order in DRC 07 bearing Ref No. ZD330721001477Q dated 15.07.2021 passed by the Respondent No.1 and quash the same as being contrary to law and
consequentially direct the Respondent No.2 to lift the bank attachment notice issued vide Form GST DRC-13 dated 26.03.2026
calling for the records relating to impugned Order Ref.No. GSTIN
33EVIPS1618P1Z0 /19-20 dated 15.07.2021 along with its summary order in DRC 07 bearing Ref No. ZD330721001479M dated 15.07.2021 passed by the Respondent No.1 and quash the same as being contrary to law and consequentially direct the Respondent No.2 to lift the bank attachment notice issued vide Form GST DRC-13 dated 26.03.2026
calling for the records relating to impugned Order Ref.No.GSTIN33EVIPS1618P1Z0/2019-20 dated 31.08.2023 along with its summary order in DRC 07 bearing Ref No. ZD330823179241G dated 31.08.2023 passed by the Respondent No.1 and quash the same as being contrary to law and consequentially direct the Respondent No.2 to lift the bank attachment notice issued vide Form GST DRC-13 dated 26.03.2026 and thus render justice.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.Balachandar R
For Respondent(s):
Ms.Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran, AGP
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 two assessment orders dated 15.07.2021 & and one assessment order 31.08.2023 passed by the respondent.
2. Ms.Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice on behalf of the respondent.
3. By consent of the parties, the main writ petitions are 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 order came to be passed by the respondent without providing any opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. Hence, this petition has been filed.
5. Further, he would submit that the petitioner is ready and willing to pay 50% of the disputed tax amount to the respondent in each petitions. 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 order. Therefore, she requested this Court to remit the matter back to the respondent, subject to the payment of 50% of the disputed tax amount by the petitioner.
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 is ready and willing to pay 50% of the disputed tax amount to the respondent in each petitions. In such view of the matter, this Court is inclined to set aside two impugned orders dated 15.07.2021 & one impugned order dated 31.08.2023 passed by the 1st respondent. Accordingly, this Court passes the following order:-
(i) Two impugned orders dated 15.07.2021 & one impugned order dated 31.08.2023 are set aside and the matters are remanded to the 1st respondent for fresh consideration on condition that the petitioner shall pay 50% of disputed tax amount to the respondent, in each petitions, within a period of four 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 1st 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.
(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, vide attachment notice dated 26.03.2026, cannot survive any longer and hence, it is to be lifted. As a sequel, the concerned Bank is directed to release the attachment, and de-freeze the bank account of the petitioner, immediately upon the production of a copy of this order along with the proof with regard to the payment made by the petitioner as stated above.
12. With the above directions, these writ petitions are disposed of. No costs. 07-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No nsa To
1. The State Tax Officer Cholavaram Assesment Circle, Integrated C.T. Complex, Chennai North Division, No.32, I Floor,Elephant Gate Bridge Road, Chennai 600 003
2. The Assistant Commissioner ST Cholavaram Assessment Circle, Integrated Buildings for Commercial Taxes, No.32, Elephant Gate Bridge Road, Off Wall Tax Road Vepery, Chennai
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY J. nsa WP No. 39692, 39686 & 39683 of 2026 07-10-2026 (2/2)