Tvl. Jmj Plastics v. The Assistant Commissioner (St)
1 W.P.(MD)NO.34779 OF 2025 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 28.11.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN W.P.(MD)No.34779 of 2025 AND W.M.P.(MD)Nos.27479 & 27481 of 2025 Tvl.J.M.J.Plastics, Rep. by its Proprietor C.Starlin, GSTIN 33CVDPS7028A1ZU, 101-1, Othaveedu, Masthanpatti, Vandiyur, Madurai - 625 020.
... Petitioner Vs.
1. The Assistant Commissioner(ST), Madurai Rural East Assessment Circle, Commercial Taxes Buildings, Madurai - 625 020.
2. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Commercial Taxes Department, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
3. Union of India, Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Finance(MOF), Raj Path Marg, 'E'Block, Central Secretariat, New Delhi - 110 011.
... Respondents Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records on the file of the third respondent in notifications issued in 1/6
2 W.P.(MD)NO.34779 OF 2025 Notification No.9/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 along with its notification No.56/2023-Central Tax dated 28.12.2023 on the file of the third respondent herein corresponding second respondent's proceedings in G.O.Ms.No.41 dated 05.04.2023 and consequential assessment order passed by the first respondent in GSTIN: 33CVDPS7028A1ZU,/2017-18 dated 19.12.2023 vide reference No.ZD331223142528M dated 19.12.2023) for the assessment year 2017-18 and quash the same as ultra vires Section 168A of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 cannot act retrospectively, apart from being violative of Article 14, 246A and 265 of the Constitution of India, 1950.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Sudalai Muthu For Respondents : Mr.J.K.Jeyaselan, Government Advocate for R-1 & R-2.
Mr.K.Govindarajan for R-3.
* * *
O R D E R
The petitioner is before this Court challenging the impugned assessment order dated 19.12.2023 for the assessment year 2017-2018. 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 2/6
3 W.P.(MD)NO.34779 OF 2025 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 as per 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:
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 3/6
4 W.P.(MD)NO.34779 OF 2025 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.
4/6
5 W.P.(MD)NO.34779 OF 2025 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.
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. The attachment made on the petitioner's bank account shall stand lifted forthwith and without any delay.
6. It is open to the respondents to proceed further in the light of the final 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) filed against the order of the Telegana High Court. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
28.11.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No PMU 5/6
6 W.P.(MD)NO.34779 OF 2025 G.R.SWAMINATHAN,J.
PMU To:
1. The Assistant Commissioner(ST), Madurai Rural East Assessment Circle, Commercial Taxes Buildings, Madurai - 625 020.
2. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Commercial Taxes Department, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
W.P.(MD)No.34779 of 2025 28.11.2025 6/6