Thomas, v. The Deputy Commissioner Of Gst Appeal

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 12.11.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.25459 and 25460 of 2025 Thomas ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Deputy Commissioner of GST Appeal, Theni.

2.The Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, Bodinayakanur, Theni District.

... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of the order passed by the 2nd respondent in Reference No.ZD330724244080S dated 20.07.2024 quash the same as arbitrary and illegal.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sakthi Siddharth For Respondents : Mr.J.K.Jeyaselan, Government Advocate.

1/6

ORDER

The petitioner is before this Court challenging the impugned assessment order dated 20.07.2024 for the assessment year 2019- 2020. This writ petition has been filed long after the assessment order has been passed.

2.The petitioner had also challenged the notification issued under Section 168A of the Goods and Services Tax Enactments, 2017. It is also noticed that the petitioner has not replied to the notices that proceeded the impugned order. Ordinarily this Court may have intervened by putting the petitioner to terms with the consistent view followed by this Court.

3.However, It is noticed that a detailed order has recently been passed by the Principal Bench of this Court in a batch of cases in M/s.Tata Play Limited vs. Union of India and others, reported in 2025

(7) TMI 772, wherein impugned notification issued under Section 168 A of the Act has been quashed with certain directions. The operative portion of the said order reads as under:

"10. Conclusion:

2/6

i) The authorities under the CGST Act shall have the benefit of exclusion of the period 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022, while reckoning limitation under sub section (2) and (10) to Section 73 of CGST Act, in terms of the of the Supreme Court dated 10.01.2022 passed under Article 142 of the Constitution. ii) Notification Nos.9 and 56 of 2023 stands vitiated and illegal for the following reasons:

a) It results in diminishing / curtailing the limitation which was otherwise available in view of the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court under Article 142 of Constitution, and thus contrary to the object of Section 168A of CGST Act. b) It proceeds on an erroneous assumption of the limitation available and a misconception as to the scope and effect of the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court under Article 142 of Constitution. The impugned notification made on an erroneous assumption of the position in law is unsustainable on the ground of being arbitrary.

c) The impugned notification results in extinguishing vested right of action with the authorities under CGST Act by diminishing the limitation thus suffers from the vice of arbitrariness. d) The impugned notification is issued on the basis of recommendation made without examining relevant materials discussed supra and thus stands vitiated.

e) In addition to the above reasons, impugned notification No.56/2023 is made even prior to the recommendations of the GST Council, failure to comply with the statutory mandate renders the notification illegal.

f) The impugned notification no.56/2023 is issued on the basis of the recommendations of GIC which cannot be a substitute for GST Council and thus stands vitiated.

4.The said order has been followed by this Court in several cases including the order passed in W.P.(MD)No.19943 of 2025 vide order dated 23.07.2025.

3/6

5.In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of by quashing the impugned assessment order and the case is remitted back to the respondents to pass fresh order on merits. However, it is open to the respondents to proceed further based on the outcome of the order to be passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court under similar circumstances in the case of HCC-SEW-MEIL-AAG JV Vs. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax (S.L.P.No.4240 of 2025) against the order of the Telegana High Court.

6.The petitioner has filed an appeal against the impugned assessment order. Since the impugned assessment order has already been quashed, the petitioner proposes to withdraw the appeal itself. Even while permitting the writ petitioner to withdraw his appeal filed against the impugned assessment order, the pre-deposit made by him may be adjusted against the petitioner's future tax liability. 7.The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner's bank account has been attached. The attachment effected on the 4/6

petitioner's bank account is directed to be lifted forthwith and without any delay. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

12.11.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No ias To:

1.The Deputy State Tax Officer (ST), Theni - 1.

2.The Secretary, Commercial Taxes Registration (B1) Department, Fort ST.George, Chennai - 600 009.

5/6

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

ias 12.11.2025 6/6