WP/41628/2026 of Muniswamy Prabakar Vs the assistant commissioner (st) (fac) on 9 October 2026

COMMON ORDER

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned orders dated 04.02.2025 & 08.01.2025.

2. Mr.B.Sivaraman, learned Government Advocate, takes notice on behalf of the respondents in both writ petitions. By consent of the parties, these main writ petitions are taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in these cases, the petitioner’s GST Registration was cancelled on 05.05.2021, since there was no business operation. Subsequently, the first respondent uploaded a show cause notice dated 07.06.2024 under the “View Additional Notices and Orders” column in the GST common portal. Since the petitioner was not aware of the said notice, they failed to file their reply within the time. Under these circumstances, the impugned order came to be passed by the first respondent without providing any opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. Hence, this petition has been filed.

4. Further, he would submit that the two separate officers of the respondent department has passed two separate adjudication orders in respect of the same financial year 2020-21, both proceeding upon the same issue i.e., alleged discrepancy between the GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B of the petitioner. Hence, he prayed for appropriate orders.

5. Learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents has fairly submitted that since two separate adjudication orders were passed in respect of the same financial year 2020-21, this Court may set aside and remit the matter for fresh consideration.

6. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

7. In the case on hand, subsequent to the cancellation of GST Registration of the petitioner, the show cause notice was uploaded by the respondent in the GST portal, due to which, the petitioner was unable to file their reply. Further, it is clear that no opportunity of personal hearing was provided to the petitioner prior to the passing of impugned order.

8. Further, the total tax liability in both the cases is about Rs.20,82,610/-. The issue with regard to the tax liability has already been quantified in the impugned order dated 08.01.2025 by the Deputy Commercial Tax Officer. However, without taking into consideration of the same, the Assistant Commissioner passed an order for the same liability to an extent of Rs.20,86,610/- vide order dated 04.02.2025. Therefore, the impugned order passed on 04.02.2025 is the duplication of the order dated 08.01.2025. Hence, this Court is of the view that the impugned order passed on 04.02.2025 is liable to be set aside and the same is hereby set aside.

9. In regard to impugned order dated 08.01.2025, this Court is inclined to set aside the same and passes the following order:-

(i) The impugned order dated 08.01.2025 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the concerned respondent for fresh consideration on condition that the petitioner shall pay 25% of disputed tax amount to the respondent department, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and 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 receipt of 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.

(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, the concerned Bank is directed to de-freeze the bank account of the petitioner, upon production of the proof of payment of the said amount along with a copy of this order by the petitioner and permit them to operate the accounts normally. With the above observation and directions, the W.P.No.41563 of 2026 is disposed of and W.P.No.41628 of 2026 stands allowed. No costs. W.M.P.Nos.46644 & 46682 of 2026 filed to dispense the production of impugned orders are allowed. Consequently, W.M.P.Nos.46645 & 46683 of 2026 stands closed. 09-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No VM

To:-

1. The assistant commissioner (st) (fac) Hosur (South) -I Circle, Hosur, Krishnagiri District, Tamil Nadu.

2. The Deputy State Tax Officer-2, Office of the Assistant Commissioner (ST), Hosur (South-1) Hosur, Krishnagiri District, Tamilnadu.

3. The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer – 2, Hosur (South-1) Circle, Hosur, Krishnagiri District, Tamilnadu.

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J. VM WP Nos. 41628 & 41563 of 2026

09-10-2026