Facts of the Case

M/s. Raamdev Logistics, a proprietary concern in Thoothukudi, challenged an assessment order dated 22.12.2025 for GSTIN 33AJFPV4357B1ZB (tax period 2021-22), and sought defreezing of its bank account attached pursuant to that order. A show cause notice had been issued on 10.07.2025, but the petitioner did not file a timely reply; personal hearing notices followed on 03.10.2025, 25.10.2025 and 21.11.2025, and the petitioner's reply was ultimately filed belatedly on 19.12.2025, by when the petitioner could not avail of the personal hearing opportunities offered.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether relief can be granted where the petitioner itself delayed filing its reply and thereby missed the personal hearing opportunities that were in fact offered.
  2. On what terms should such relief be granted, balancing the taxpayer's case on merits against its own delay.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The order was impugned mainly on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice and non-availing of a personal hearing opportunity.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The Government Standing Counsel pointed out that multiple personal hearing notices (03.10.2025, 25.10.2025 and 21.11.2025) were issued, and the delay in filing the reply lay squarely with the petitioner.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Court noted that although the delay in availing the personal hearing was attributable to the petitioner, considering the submissions on the merits of the discrepancies and the overall facts, an opportunity could still be granted, but only on terms.
  • The writ petition was allowed on condition that the petitioner deposit 25% of the disputed tax amount within four weeks from receipt of the order.
  • Upon such deposit, the impugned assessment order stands set aside and the matter remanded to the first respondent, with the petitioner permitted to file additional reply and documents for fresh consideration on merits.
  • Since the assessment order is set aside, the freezing of the petitioner's bank account was directed to stand raised upon the 25% deposit being made.

Important Clarification

  • Even where the delay in engaging with a show cause notice and personal hearing is entirely the taxpayer's own, courts continue to grant a conditional final opportunity on a percentage pre-deposit, rather than treating the taxpayer's default as fatal.
  • Relief that sets aside the assessment order automatically extends to lifting any bank account attachment that was consequential to that order, once the deposit condition is met.

Sections Involved

  • Section 73, TNGST/CGST Act, 2017 — determination of tax not involving fraud or suppression.
  • Section 79, GST Act, 2017 — recovery of tax, including bank attachment.

Decision – In Favour of

Disposed of in favour of the Assessee, on terms — the assessment order is set aside and the bank attachment lifted on payment of 25% of the disputed tax.

Case Details

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; W.P(MD) No. 15179 of 2026 and W.M.P(MD) No. 11365 of 2026; Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy; Order dated 05.06.2026.

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.