M/S Anandcine Service Private Limited v. State Tax Officer
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 25.06.2025
CORAM
The HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY Writ Petition No.22814 of 2025 and WMP.Nos.25635 & 25636 of 2025 M/s Anandcine Service Private Limited, Represented by its Authorised Signatory, Thiru Manohar Prasad Akkineni, No.3, Sarangapani Street, T. Nagar, Chennai - 600 017
...Petitioner
Vs.
1. State Tax Officer Pondy Bazaar Assessment Circle, No. 46 Greenways Road, Mylapore Taluk Office Building, Chennai 600 028.
2. Deputy Commissioner (ST), GST Appeal, Chennai -1, Main Building, II Floor, Room No.210, No.1, Greams Road, Chennai - 600 006 ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for 1/8
issuance of Writ of Certiorari calling for the impugned show cause notice in DRC-01 dated 28.12.2023 along with DRC-01 uploaded in reference number ZD331223236851O dated 28.12.2023 & impugned order dated 23.04.2024 in reference number 33AAPCA9907J1Z9/2018-19 for the assessment year 2018-19 and order in ARN/AD330225014805P/2018-19 dated 30.08.2024 (signed on 06.05.2025) passed by the 2nd respondent and quash the same as illegal and devoid of merits. For Petitioner : Mr.T.Suresh For Respondents : Mr.T.N.C.Kaushik, Additional Government Pleader (T)
O R D E R
Mr.T.N.C.Kaushik, learned Additional Government Pleader (Taxes), takes notice on behalf of the respondents. With consent, the main Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.
2. The challenge in this Writ Petition is to the order dated 23.04.2024 passed by the 1st respondent and consequential rejection of the 2nd respondent dated 30.08.2024 and to quash the same. 2/8
3. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the 1st respondent issued show cause notice dated 28.12.2023, followed by two reminders dated 21.02.2024 and 07.03.2024 to the petitioner by uploading the same in the GST portal. Therefore, the petitioner was not aware of the show cause notice and hence failed to file its reply. Since the petitioner failed to file reply to the show cause notice, the 1st respondent passed the impugned assessment order dated 23.04.2024 and the same was also uploaded in the GST portal. The petitioner came to know of the impugned assesement order belatedly. Immediately after coming to know of the assessment order, the petitioner filed an appeal before the 2nd respondent on 06.02.2025 with a delay of 168 days and the same was rejected by the 2nd respondent on the ground of delay. He therefore requested this court to condone the delay and direct the 2nd respondent to take the appeal on file.
4. The learned Additional Government Pleader (Taxes) appearing for the respondents would submit that since the 2nd respondent has no power to condone the delay beyond the period of limitation, the appeal filed by the petitioner came to be rejected. Further, he would submit this Court may 3/8
condone the delay subject to terms.
5. In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has already deposited 10% of the disputed tax at the time of filing appeal and now ready to deposit another 5% of disputed tax over and above the 10% before the authority concerned.
6. Heard both sides and also perused the materials available on record.
7. Heard both sides and also perused the materials available on record.
8. In the present case, since all the notices were uploaded in the GST portal without serving the physical copy to the petitioner, the petitioner was not aware of the same and could not file its reply which resulted in the passing of impugned assesement order and the same was also uploaded in the GST portal. The petitioner came to know of the assesement order 4/8
belatedly. Therefore, the petitioner could not file appeal within time and that apart now the petitioner is ready to deposit 5% of disputed tax over and above 10% before the authority concerned.
9. Considering the aforesaid facts and in view of the settled proposition of law that when substantial justice is pitted against technical consideration, credence should be given to the substantial justice, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent dated 30.08.2024 and condone the delay of 168 in filing the Appeal before the 2nd Respondent. Accordingly, this Court passes the following order:- (i) Accordingly, the impugned order dated 30.08.2024 passed by the 2nd respondent is set aside and the delay of 168 days in filing the appeal before the 2nd respondent is condoned subject to payment of 5% of disputed tax demand, apart from statutory deposit of 10% before the 2nd respondent.
(ii) On such payment being made, the 1st respondent is directed to take the appeal on record and 5/8
pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, after providing sufficient opportunity to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible.
10. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed. 25.06.2025 Index : Yes / No (2/3) : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No arr 6/8
To
1. State Tax Officer Pondy Bazaar Assessment Circle, No. 46 Greenways Road, Mylapore Taluk Office Building, Chennai 600 028.
2. Deputy Commissioner (ST), GST Appeal, Chennai -1, Main Building, II Floor, Room No.210, No.1, Greams Road, Chennai - 600 006 7/8
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.
arr Writ Petition No.22814 of 2025 and WMP.Nos.25635 & 25636 of 2025 25.06.2025 8/8