KBS MOTORS vs The Assistant Commissioner
- Court
- Madras High Court
WP No. 42685 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 28-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
WP No. 42685, 42686 & 42689 of 2026
CNR:{HCMA012429702026}
AND WMP NO. 47970, 47971, 47972, 47973, 47974 & 47975 OF 2026
Kbs Motors, Rep by its proprietor
D.Karthikeyan S/o.Devarajran
No.7/A Vathiyar Subbarayan Street
Chennai 600 083.
..Petitioner(s) in all
petitions
Vs
The Assistant Commissioner
Ekkatuthangal Assessment Circle
Integerated building for Commercial
Taxes and Reg. Dept South Tower Room No.305
3rd Floor Nandanam Chennai 600 035.
..Respondent(s) in all
petitions
Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying
for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus,
calling for the records relating to the Respondents impugned
summary of the order vide ref. No. ZD3303260676491/2022-2023 dated
09.03.2026 FORM GST DRC-07 with connected detailed Proceedings GSTIN
/ 33AZAPK1762E2ZT/ 2022-2023 dated 09.03.2026 under Section 73 of the
TNGST Act 2017and quash the same and consequently direct the Respondent to
reconsider the matter afresh after providing a fair and reasonable opportunity of
hearing to the Petitioner and permitting the Petitioner to submit all supporting
documents
calling for the records relating to the Respondents impugned
summary of the order vide ref. No. ZD331225297271H/2021-2022 dated
__________
Page1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:58 pm )
WP No. 42685 of 2026
18.12.2025 FORM GST DRC-07 with connected detailed Proceedings GSTIN
/ 33AZAPK1762E2ZT/ 2021-2022 dated 18.12.2025 under Section 73 of the
TNGST Act 2017 and quash the same and consequently direct the Respondent
to reconsider the matter afresh after providing a fair and reasonable opportunity
of hearing to the Petitioner and permitting the Petitioner to submit all supporting
documents
calling for the records relating to the Respondents impugned
summary of the order vide ref. No. ZD33034261968506/2023-2024 dated
22.04.2026 FORM GST DRC-07 with connected detailed Proceedings GSTIN
/ 33AZAPK1762E2ZT/ 2023-2024 dated 22.04.2026 under Section 73 of the
TNGST Act 2017 and quash the same and consequently direct the Respondent
to reconsider the matter afresh after providing a fair and reasonable opportunity
of hearing to the Petitioner and permitting the Petitioner to submit all supporting
documents
For Petitioner(s): Mr.Bhoopalan D
For Respondent(s): Mr.B.Sivaraman Ga (t)
Order
These writ petitions have been filed challenging the orders dated
09.03.2026, 18.12.2025 & 22.04.2026 passed by the respondent.
2. Mr.B.Sivaraman, learned Government Advocate, takes notice on behalf
of the respondent.
3. By consent of the parties, the main writ petitions are taken up for
disposal at the admission stage itself.
__________
Page2 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:58 pm )
WP No. 42685 of 2026
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in these case,
all notices/communications were uploaded by the respondent in the GST
common portal. Since the petitioner had failed to view the portal, they were not
aware of the said notices, due to which, they failed to file their reply within the
time. Under these circumstances, the impugned orders came to be passed by the
respondent without providing any opportunity of personal hearing to the
petitioner. Hence, these petitions have been filed.
5. Further, she would submit that the petitioner is ready and willing to pay
25% of the disputed tax amount, in each petitions, to the respondent. Hence, he
requests this Court to grant an opportunity to the petitioner to present their case
before the respondent by setting aside the impugned order.
6. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent
would submit that the respondent had uploaded the notices in the GST Online
Portal. But the petitioner failed to avail the said opportunity. Further, she has
fairly admitted that no opportunity of personal hearing was provided to the
petitioner prior to the passing of impugned order. Therefore, she requested this
Court to remit the matter back to the respondent, subject to the payment of 25%
of the disputed tax amount by the petitioner.
__________
Page3 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:58 pm )
WP No. 42685 of 2026
7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent and
also perused the materials available on record.
8. In the cases on hand, it is evident that the show cause notice was
uploaded on the GST Portal Tab. According to the petitioner, he was not aware
of the issuance of the said show cause notice issued through the GST Portal and
the original of the said show cause notice was not furnished to them. In such
circumstances, this Court is of the view that the impugned assessment order
came to be passed without affording any opportunity of personal hearing to the
petitioner, confirming the proposals contained in the show cause notice.
9. No doubt, sending notice by uploading in portal is a sufficient service,
but, the Officer, who is sending the repeated reminders, despite the fact that no
response from the petitioner to the show cause notices etc., should have applied
his/her mind and explored the possibility of sending notices by way of other
modes prescribed in Section 169 of the GST Act, which are also the valid mode
of service under the Act, otherwise it will not be an effective service, rather, it
would only amount to fulfilling the empty formalities. Merely passing an ex
parte order by fulfilling the empty formalities will not serve any useful purpose
and the same will only pave way for multiplicity of litigations, not only wasting
__________
Page4 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:58 pm )
WP No. 42685 of 2026
the time of the Officer concerned, but also the precious time of the Appellate
Authority/Tribunal and this Court as well.
10. Thus, when there is no response from the tax payer to the notice sent
through a particular mode, the Officer who is issuing notices should strictly
explore the possibilities of sending notices through some other mode as
prescribed in Section 169(1) of the Act, preferably by way of RPAD, which
would ultimately achieve the object of the GST Act. Therefore, this Court finds
that there has been lack of efforts in exploring the available opportunities to
serve the notices/orders etc., effectively on the petitioner.
11. Further, it was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that
the petitioner is ready and willing to pay 25% of the disputed tax amount, in
each petitions, to the respondent. In such view of the matter, this Court is
inclined to set aside the impugned orders dated 09.03.2026, 18.12.2025 &
22.04.2026 passed by the respondent. Accordingly, this Court passes the
following order:-
(i) The impugned orders dated 09.03.2026, 18.12.2025
& 22.04.2026 are set aside and the matters are remanded to
the respondent for fresh consideration on condition that the
petitioner shall pay 25% of the disputed tax amount, in each
petitions, to the respondent, within a period of four weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The setting
__________
Page5 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:58 pm )
WP No. 42685 of 2026
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 payment of amount as stated above.
(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.
12. With the above directions, these writ petitions are disposed of. No
costs. Consequently, the miscellaneous petitions in WMP.Nos.47971, 47973 &
47975 of 2026 are closed. The miscellaneous petition in WMP.Nos.47970,
47972 & 47974 of 2026, which have been filed to dispense with the production
of original assessment order, are ordered.
28-10-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
nsa
__________
Page6 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:58 pm )
WP No. 42685 of 2026
To
The Assistant Commissioner
Ekkatuthangal Assessment Circle
Integerated building for Commercial
Taxes and Reg. Dept
South Tower Room No.305
3rd Floor Nandanam
Chennai 600 035.
__________
Page7 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:58 pm )
WP No. 42685 of 2026
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY J.
nsa
WP No. 42685, 42686 & 42689 of 2026
28-10-2026
__________
Page8 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:58 pm )