Madras High Court
WP(MD)/30962/2026 of Nagaa Traders Vs The State Tax Officer on 30 October 2026
WP(MD) No. 30962 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 30-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR
RAMAMOORTHY
WP(MD) No. 30962 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD011521372026}
WMP (MD) Nos.23762 & 233763 of 2026
Nagaa Traders
Rep by its Proprietrix Baskaran Mala, 23, W-5, Upstairs, East Maravar Street, Soundravel Lane, Bodinayakanur, Theni - 625 513
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
The State Tax Officer
Bodinayakanur Assessment Circle,
Bodinayakanur, Theni District
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records in the proceedings of the respondent in the impugned order passed by the respondent under Section 73 with Form GST DRC-07 bearing Reference No.ZD330424135329I dated 17.04.2024, together with Form GST DRC-01 bearing Reference No.ZD330124010558T dated 03.01.2024 and the consequential order in Form GST SPL-07 bearing Reference No.ZD330925166192A dated 15.09.2025, and quash the same, and consequently direct the respondent to refund the sum of Rs.7,792/- and to re-direct the sum of Rs.42,697/- to the electronic credit ledger of the petitioner, and pass such further or other orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.
For Petitioner(s)
:M/s R Karthik
__________
Page 1 of 3
( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 06:32:17 pm )
WP(MD) No. 30962 of 2026
For Respondent(s)
:Mr.R.Parthiban, SGP
ORDER
An order dated 17.04.2024 under Section 73 of the applicable GST enactments and the subsequent order rejecting the petitioner's application under Section 128A of the applicable GST enactments are assailed in this writ petition.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the intimation, show cause notice and impugned order were uploaded on the common portal and that the petitioner was unaware of the same. He also submits that more than 50% of the tax demand under the impugned order was recovered pursuant thereto.
3. Accepting notice for the sole respondent, Mr.R.Parthiban, learned Special Government Pleader, submits that the petitioner was aware of the proceedings in the year 2025 when he filed an application for waiver.
4. The record reflects that the order in original was issued ex parte. After such order was issued and after making part payment of taxes, the __________
Page 2 of 3
( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 06:32:17 pm )
WP(MD) No. 30962 of 2026 petitioner applied for waiver under Section 128A. Since the whole of the tax was not paid on or before the due date, the application for waiver was rejected. Such rejection is entirely in order and no interference is warranted.
5. Nonetheless, in view of more than 50% of the tax demand under the impugned order having been remitted by the petitioner, the impugned order in original is set aside so as to provide an opportunity to the petitioner to contest the matter on merits. The impugned order is set aside subject to verifying and confirming the recovery. After providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, a fresh order shall be issued within five months from the date of confirming the above-mentioned recovery.
6. This writ petition stands disposed of on the above terms. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 30-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No PKN __________
( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 06:32:17 pm )
WP(MD) No. 30962 of 2026 To The State Tax Officer Bodinayakanur Assessment Circle Bodinayakanur, Theni District __________
( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 06:32:17 pm )
WP(MD) No. 30962 of 2026 SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J. PKN WP(MD) No. 30962 of 2026 30-10-2026 __________
( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 06:32:17 pm )
Page 3 of 3
Loading citations and judicial treatment…