IDAPPADI MUNICIPALITY vs The Sate Tax Officer
- Court
- Madras High Court
WP No. 44379 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 30-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
WP No. 44379, 44400 & 44386 of 2026
CNR:{HCMA012481272026}
AND
WMP NO. 49778, 49779, 49785, 49786, 49810 & 49811 OF 2026
Idappadi Municipality
Rep. by its Commissioner,
155, Jalakandapuram Road,
Salem, Tamil Nadu-637101,
GSTIN 33AAALI0093B1ZR
..Petitioner(s) in all
petitions
Vs
The Sate Tax Officer
Inspection III, Salem (Intelligence) Division,
Commercial Taxes Department,
Commercial Taxes Building,
Pitchards Road, Hasthampatti,
Salem 636007
..Respondent(s) in all
petitions
Common Prayer:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying
for issuance of Writ of Certiorari,
calling for the records relating to the Order passed by the
Respondent in Form GST-DRC-07 bearing Reference No. ZD330225061752M
under Section 74 of the TNGST Act, 2017 dated 06.02.2025 in respect of the
FY 2023-24, quash the same
calling for the records relating to the Order passed by the
Respondent in Form GST-DRC-07 bearing reference number
ZD330225061842L under Section 74 of the TNGST Act, 2017 dated
06.02.2025 in respect of the FY 2022-23, quash the same
__________
Page1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 06:42:46 pm )
WP No. 44379 of 2026
calling for the records relating to the Order passed by the
Respondent in Form GST-DRC-07 under Section 74 of the TNGST Act, 2017
dated 06.02.2025 in respect of the Financial Year FY 2020-21, bearing
Reference No. ZD330225061991G and quash the same
For Petitioner(s): Mr.L.P.Maurya
For Respondent(s): Mr.I.Dinesh, AGP
Common Order
These writ petitions have been filed challenging the orders dated
06.02.2025 passed by the respondent.
2. Mr.I.Dinesh, learned Additional Government Pleader, 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.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in these cases,
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
__________
Page2 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 06:42:46 pm )
WP No. 44379 of 2026
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, he would submit that the petitioner has already paid 50% of
the disputed tax amount, in WP.No.44379 & 44386 of 2026, and the entire
disputed tax amount, in WP.No.44400 of 2026, 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 orders.
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, he has
fairly admitted that no opportunity of personal hearing was provided to the
petitioner prior to the passing of impugned orders. Therefore, he requested this
Court to remit the matter back to the respondent.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent and
also perused the materials available on record.
__________
Page3 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 06:42:46 pm )
WP No. 44379 of 2026
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
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
__________
Page4 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 06:42:46 pm )
WP No. 44379 of 2026
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 has already paid 50% of the disputed tax amount, in
WP.No.44379 & 44386 of 2026, and the entire disputed tax amount, in
WP.No.44400 of 2026, to the respondent. In such view of the matter, this Court
is inclined to set aside the impugned orders dated 06.02.2025 passed by the
respondent. Accordingly, this Court passes the following order:-
(i) The impugned orders dated 06.02.2025 are set
aside and the matters are remanded to the respondent for fresh
consideration.
(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 receipt of a copy of this order.
(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.
__________
Page5 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 06:42:46 pm )
WP No. 44379 of 2026
12. With the above directions, these writ petitions are disposed of. No
costs. Consequently, the miscellaneous petitions in WMP.Nos.49779 & 49786
of 2026 are closed and the miscellaneous petitions in WMP.Nos.49778 &
49785 of 2026, which have been filed to dispense with the production of
original assessment order, are ordered.
30-10-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
nsa
To
The Sate Tax Officer
Inspection III, Salem (Intelligence) Division,
Commercial Taxes Department,
Commercial Taxes Building,
Pitchards Road, Hasthampatti, Salem 636007
__________
Page6 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 06:42:46 pm )
WP No. 44379 of 2026
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY J.
nsa
WP No. 44379 of 2026
AND
WP NO. 44400 OF 2026,WP NO. 44386 OF 2026,WMP NO. 49778 OF
2026,WMP NO. 49779 OF 2026,WMP NO. 49785 OF 2026,WMP NO.
49786 OF 2026,WMP NO. 49810 OF 2026,WMP NO. 49811 OF 2026
30-10-2026
__________
Page7 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/11/2026 06:42:46 pm )