← Library
Madras High CourtWP/33765/2025disposed of

Sri Kaladevan Designer Tiles And Pavers v. The Deputy State Tax Officer Ii

2025-09-11Honourable Mr.Justice Mohammed Shaffiq8 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 11-09-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ and WMP.Nos. 37887 & 37888 of 2025

1. Sri Kaladevan Designer Tiles & Pavers 11, 216 /4, Lakshmi Nagar, Kolapakkam Chennai 600127 Rep by its Proprietor Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The Deputy State Tax Officer -II Thirukazhukundram Assessment circle, Chengalpattu.

Respondent(s) PRAYER:- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking issuance of writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records of the Respondent leading to issuance of Impugned Order dated 21.01.2025 vide ZD330125168093O and quash the same and direct the Respondent to pass order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner. For Petitioner(s):

Ms.D.Pavithra For Respondent:

Mrs.R.Vasanthamala Government Advocate

ORDER

The present writ petition is filed challenging the impugned order dated 21.01.2025 relating to the assessment year 2020-21.

2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is engaged in the business of making cement / hallow bricks and is registered under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. During the relevant period 2020-21, the petitioner filed its returns and paid the appropriate taxes. However, on verification of the returns, a discrepancy was found that there is an excess claim of Input Tax Credit.

3. Pursuant thereto, a notice in DRC-01 was issued on 25.11.2024 with a personal hearing on 06.12.2024 followed by three reminder notices dated 26.12.2024, 02.01.2025 and 10.01.2025. However, the petitioner had not responded to any of the above notices, the impugned order was thus passed confirming the proposal. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that neither the show cause notices nor the impugned order of

assessment has been served on the petitioner by tender or sending it by RPAD, instead it had been uploaded under "additional notices and orders" tab on the GST Portal, thereby, the petitioner was unaware of the initiated proceedings and was thus unable to participate in the adjudication proceedings. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that if the petitioner is provided with an opportunity, they would be able to explain the alleged discrepancies.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would place reliance upon the recent judgment of this Court in the case of M/s.K.Balakrishnan, Balu Cables vs. O/o. the Assistant Commissioner of GST & Central Excise in W.P.(MD)No.11924 of 2024 dated 10.06.2024, to submit that this court has remanded the matter back in similar circumstances subject to payment of 25% of the disputed taxes. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that they would withdraw the appeal which is filed beyond the statutory period of limitation.

5. It was further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to pay 25% of the disputed tax and that they may be granted one final opportunity before the adjudicating authority to put forth their objections to the proposal. It was submitted that pursuant to the impugned order of assessment, recovery proceedings were initiated and bank accounts have been attached and requests that the same may be lifted on payment of 25% of disputed taxes, to which the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent does not have any serious objection.

6. By consent of both parties, the writ petition stands disposed of on the following terms:

a) The impugned order dated 21.01.2025 is set aside. b) The petitioner shall deposit 25% of the disputed taxes as admitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent, within a period of four weeks from the date of uploading of web copy without waiting for the receipt of the certified copy.

c) If any amount has been recovered or paid out of the disputed taxes, including by way of pre-deposit in appeal, the same would be reduced/adjusted, from/towards the 25% of disputed taxes directed to be paid. The assessing authority shall then intimate the balance amount out of 25 % of disputed taxes to be paid, if any, within a period of one week from the date of uploading of web copy without waiting for the receipt of the certified copy. The petitioner shall deposit such remaining sum within a period of three weeks from such intimation.

d) Failure to comply with the above condition viz., payment of 25% of disputed taxes within the stipulated period i.e., four weeks from the date of uploading of web copy of this order, shall result in restoration of the impugned order.

e) If there is any recovery by way of attachment of Bank account or garnishee proceedings, the same shall be lifted /withdrawn on complying with the above condition viz., payment of 25 % of the disputed taxes. f) On complying with the above condition, the impugned order of assessment shall be treated as show cause notice and the petitioner shall submit

its objections within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of compliance of the conditions relating to deposit in Clause (b) and (c) supra, along with supporting documents/material. If any such objections are filed, the same shall be considered by the respondent and orders shall be passed in accordance with law after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. It is made clear that if the above conditions viz., payment of 25% of disputed taxes is not complied or objections are not filed within the stipulated time as stated above the impugned order of assessment shall stand restored.

7. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

11-09-2025 kkn Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes

To 1.The Deputy State Tax Officer - II, Thirukazhukundram Assessment circle, Chengalpattu.

MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ J.

KKN 11-09-2025