M/s Muthu Fausta Traders vs Deputy State Tax Officer
- Court
- Madras High Court
WP Nos. 43237 and 43241 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 29-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
WP Nos. 43237 and 43241 of 2026
and WMP Nos.48560, 48561, 48562 and 48564 of 2026
CNR:{HCMA012466392026}
M/s Muthu Fausta Traders
Rep by its partne Mr. M. Divyaruban
93/3, Trunk Road, Porur,
Tiruvallur, Chennai 600 116
..Petitioner in both W.Ps.
Vs
The Deputy State Tax Officer,
Porur Assessment Circle,
Poonamallee Zone, Kanchipuram Division,
No.4/109, 1st Floor, Bangalore
Highway Road, Varadharajapuram,
Nazaratpet, Chennai.
..Respondent(s)
WP No. 43237 of 2026
PRAYER: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India seeking the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the
records of impugned order dated 16.08.2024 in Form GST DRC-07 bearing
Reference No.ZD3308241343986 along with its annexure passed in Petitioners
GSTIN 33ABMFM5137B1ZJ for the FY 2019-20 and quash the same and
consequently direct the Respondent to pass fresh order after providing an
opportunity of personal hearing and to accept the supporting documents and
__________
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:59 pm )
WP Nos. 43237 and 43241 of 2026
pass such other or further order as this Court may deem fit and proper in the
circumstances of the case and thus render justice
WP No. 43241 of 2026
PRAYER: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India seeking the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the
records of impugned order dated 15.02.2025 in Form GST DRC-07 bearing
Reference No.ZD330225149631N along with its annexure passed in Petitioners
GSTIN 33ABMFM5137B1ZJ for the FY 2020-21 and quash the same and
consequently direct the Respondent to pass fresh order after providing an
opportunity of personal hearing and to accept the supporting documents and
pass such other or further order as this Court may deem fit and proper in the
circumstances of the case and thus render justice
For Petitioner:
Ms. Homana S
in both W.Ps.
For Respondent:
Ms. Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran
Additional Government Pleader (Taxes)
in both W.Ps.
COMMON ORDER
The present Writ Petition has been filed challenging the assessment
orders dated 16.08.2024 and 15.02.2025, respectively, passed by the respondent.
2. Ms. Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran, learned Additional Government
Pleader (Taxes) takes notice on behalf of the respondent. By consent of the
__________
Page 2 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:59 pm )
WP Nos. 43237 and 43241 of 2026
parties, the main Writ Petitions are taken up for disposal at the admission stage
itself.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in these cases,
all notices/communications were uploaded by the respondent under the “View
Additional Notices and Orders” column in the GST common portal. Since the
petitioner was not aware of the said notices, 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. Therefore, these petitions have been filed.
4. Further, she would submit that the petitioner is voluntarily willing to
pay 25% of the disputed tax amount in respect of each assessment year to the
respondent. To that effect, she has also made an endorsement in the Court
bundle. Hence, she requests this Court to grant an opportunity to the petitioner
to present their case before the respondent by setting aside the impugned order.
5. On the other hand, the learned Additional Government Pleader
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
__________
Page 3 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:59 pm )
WP Nos. 43237 and 43241 of 2026
opportunity. Further, she has fairly admitted that no opportunity of personal
hearing was provided to the petitioner prior to the passing of impugned orders.
Therefore, she requested this Court to remit the matters back to the respondent,
subject to the payment of 25% of the disputed tax amount by the petitioner.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the Additional
Government Pleader for the respondent and also perused the materials available
on record.
7. In the case 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.
8. 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
there is no response from the petitioner to the show cause notices etc., should
__________
Page 4 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:59 pm )
WP Nos. 43237 and 43241 of 2026
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.
9. 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 a lack of effort in applying the available opportunities to
serve the notices/orders etc., effectively to the petitioner.
10. Further, it was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that
the petitioner is willing to pay 25% of the disputed tax amount in respect of
each assessment year to the respondent. In such view of the matter, this Court is
__________
Page 5 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:59 pm )
WP Nos. 43237 and 43241 of 2026
inclined to set aside the impugned orders dated 16.08.2024 and 15.02.2025
passed by the respondent. Accordingly, this Court passes the following order:-
(i) The impugned orders dated 16.08.2024 and 15.02.2025
are set aside and the matters are remanded to the respondent
for fresh consideration on condition that the petitioner pays
25% of disputed tax amount in respect of each assessment
order, to the respondent within a period of four (4) weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The setting
aside of the impugned orders will take effect from the date of
payment of the said amount. In the event, any amount is
already recovered or deposited, the petitioner is granted
liberty to adjust the said amount while making payment of
25% of the disputed tax 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.
__________
Page 6 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:59 pm )
WP Nos. 43237 and 43241 of 2026
11. With the above directions, these Writ Petitions are disposed of. No
costs. W.M.P.Nos.48560 and 48562 of 2026 filed to dispense with the
production of the original impugned orders, are allowed. Consequently, the
connected Miscellaneous Petitions are also closed.
29-10-2026
Asi
To
The Deputy State Tax Officer,
Porur Assessment Circle,
Poonamallee Zone, Kanchipuram Division,
No.4/109, 1st Floor, Bangalore
Highway Road, Varadharajapuram,
Nazaratpet, Chennai.
__________
Page 7 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:59 pm )
WP Nos. 43237 and 43241 of 2026
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY J.
Asi
WP Nos. 43237 and 43241 of 2026
and WMP Nos.48560, 48561, 48562 and 48564 of 2026
29-10-2026
__________
Page 8 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/10/2026 01:31:59 pm )