Tvl. Barani Enterprises v. The Deputy State Tax Officer-2

ORDER This writ petition challenges the impugned order dated

16.12.2025, which is an assessment order passed under Section 73 of the TNGST Act 2017.

¶2I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Standing Counsel representing the revenue.

¶3By the impugned order, the assessment was made ex-parte because the petitioner did not utilise the opportunities provided. The discrepancies and grounds on which the assessment order was issued, the dealer's explanation on merits and the reasons for not participating in the assessment proceedings are summarised briefly and presented in a table below: Discrepancies found/Grounds

on which the order is passed Explanation offered by the Assessee on merits Explanation for not availing the opportunity Non-submission

of supporting documents for the claim of exemption The petitioner is dealing with exempted outward supply of Palm Jaggery bearing HSN Code: 1702, which is fully exempted from GST as per entry 94 of the Notification No.2/2017-Central Tax (Rate) dated

28.06.2017 and accordingly I filed my monthly returns claiming exemption on the same

through

GSTN Common Portal. Once, the supporting records if filed, the above issue shall be settled in accordance with law. Hence, one more opportunity for filing reply along

with

connected records. The impugned order uploaded in the GST Portal due to without knowledge

of

the petitioner. The Accountant has not informed about the impugned order.

¶4Considering the nature of the claim of exemption noted, the explanation provided by the assessee and the reason given before this Court for not availing the opportunity, I believe that an opportunity can be granted to the assessee to present their submissions and produce the relevant supporting documents before the respondent assessing officer. This Court has been extending such opportunities on equitable grounds; however, under appropriate conditions. But in this case, the commodity is an exempted from GST and therefore, an opportunity is granted to the petitioner assessee without any condition.

¶5In view of this, the writ petition is allowed on the following terms:- i. The impugned order dated 16.12.2025 shall stand set aside and the matter shall stand remanded back to the file of the respondent. ii. Within four weeks of receiving the web copy of the order, the petitioner shall file reply along with supporting documents for claim of exemption, without waiting for a certified copy of the order. iii. The assessee shall appear before the respondent without fail and submit their reply and documents in support of their claim, and it is for the respondent to consider the matter afresh and pass orders in accordance with law. iv. Since the impugned order of assessment is set aside, any attachment of the bank account made pursuant to the impugned order shall stand raised. v. No costs. Consequently the connected miscellaneous petition shall stand closed.

11.06.2026 (2/2) Index: Yes Speaking Order: Yes rgm D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY

, J.

rgm To The Deputy State Tax Officer-2, Tuticorin-III Assessment Circle, Tuticorin. and W.M.P(MD)No.11907 of 2026

11.06.2026 (2/2)

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated: 11.06.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY and W.M.P(MD)No.11907 of 2026 Tvl. Barani Enterprises, Represented by its Proprietor, D. Baskaran, 2/42, North Street, Adaikalapuram, Tiruchendur, Tuticorin District - 628 207. ... Petitioner Vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer-2, Tuticorin-III Assessment Circle, Tuticorin. ...Respondent Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of CERTIORARI, calling for records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the Respondent vide his proceedings in GSTIN 33AFYPB3656G1ZB/2021-22 dated 16-12-2025 and quash the same as it is illegal, without jurisdiction and in gross violation of Principles of Natural Justice and pass such further or other orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice. . For Petitioner :Mr.A.Satheesh Murugan For Respondent :Mr.P.Rajagopalan Senior Standing Counsel