Shipping Bazaar Private Limited v. The Deputy Commissioner (St)

ORDER Mr.V.Prashanth Kiran, learned Government Advocate takes notice for the Respondent.

¶2This Writ Petition is being disposed of at the stage of admission itself with the consent of the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Government Advocate for the Respondent.

¶3The Petitioner is before this court against the impugned order dated

30.12.2023 whereby proposal in Show Cause Notice in DRC-01 dated

22.09.2023 has been confirmed.

¶4A strange reasoning has been adopted in the impugned order which reads as under: Page3 of 6

¶5Learned Counsel for the Respondent is also unable to explain the logic or reasoning behind the impugned order.

¶6Considering the above and that the Petitioner has approached this Court long after the impugned order, the case is remitted back to the Respondent to pass a fresh order on merits.

¶7The Respondent is at liberty to issue a proper corrigendum to the show cause notice, clearly articulating the proposal contained therein.

¶8Thereafter, the Petitioner shall file a reply to the aforesaid Show Cause Notice together with requisite documents to substantiate the case by treating the impugned Order dated 30.12.2023 as an addendum to the Show Cause Notice. Page4 of 6

¶9In case the Petitioner complies with the above stipulations, the Respondent shall proceed to pass a final order on merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of three (3) months of such reply. Subject to the Petitioner complying with the above stipulations, the attachment of the bank account of the Petitioner if any, shall also stand automatically vacated.

¶10In case the Petitioner fails to comply with any of the stipulations, the Respondent is at liberty to proceed against the Petitioner to recover the tax in accordance with law as if this Writ Petition was dismissed in limine today.

¶11Needless to state, before passing any such order, the Respondent shall give due notice and also be given an opportunity of being heard to the Petitioner.

¶12This Writ Petition stands disposed of with the above observations. No costs. Connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

GV Page5 of 6 To

¶1The Deputy Commissioner (ST) Chennai Central-III Division, Office of the Commissioner, Tamil Nadu Commercial Tax Department, Chennai

¶2The Deputy State Tax Officer I Valluvarkottam Assessment Circle,Office of the Assistant Commissioner ST,No.10, Palaniappa Maligai, 4th Floor,Greams Road, Chennai 600

¶3The Assistant Commissioner ST Valluvarkottam Assessment Circle, Office of the Assistant Commissioner ST,No.10, Palaniappa Maligai, 4th Floor,Greams Road, Chennai 600 006

¶4The Assistant Commissioner ST Valluvarkottam Assessment Circle, Office of the Assistant Commissioner ST, No.10, Palaniappa Maligai, 4th Floor,Greams Road, Chennai 600 006 C.SARAVANANoJ. gv WP.No.o8155oofo2026 AND WMP.Nos.o8833o&o8834oofo2026 05-03-2026 Page6oofo6

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 05-03-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C. SARAVANAN WP No. 8155 of 2026 AND WMP NO. 8833 OF 2026, MPW NO. 8834 OF 2026 Shipping Bazaar Private Limited Represented by its Director Vinay Kumar Sethia G-3, H52, Marutham Apartments, Thiruvalluvar Nagar, Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai 600 041 ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The Deputy Commissioner (ST) Chennai Central-III Division, Office of the Commissioner, Tamil Nadu Commercial Tax Department, Chennai 2. The Deputy State Tax Officer I Valluvarkottam Assessment Circle,Office of the Assistant Commissioner ST,No.10, Palaniappa Maligai, 4th Floor,Greams Road, Chennai 600 006 3. The Assistant Commissioner ST Valluvarkottam Assessment Circle, Office of the Assistant Commissioner ST,No.10, Palaniappa Maligai, 4th Floor,Greams Road, Chennai 600 006 ..Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the order bearing Reference GSTIN / 33AAVCS0481R1ZI /2017- 2018 dated 30.12.2023 passed by the 2nd Respondent under Section 73 of the TNGST/CGST Act, quash the said order as unconstitutional and against natural justice, and consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to permit the Petitioner to Page2 of 6 file a statutory appeal against the said order by condoning the delay, and to dispose of the same on merits in accordance with law. For Petitioner(s): Mr. A.K. Rajaraman For Respondent(s): Mr.V.Prashanth Kiran, GA