Top
Begin typing your search above and press return to search.

No Scope for Remand in Detailed GST Order: Madras HC orders 100% Pre-Deposit, directs to Adjust any Recovered Amount to Deposit [Read Order]

If there is any failure to fulfil these obligations, then it will automatically result in dismissal of the writ petition, which grants liberty to the GST department for the recovery.

No Scope for Remand in Detailed GST Order: Madras HC orders 100% Pre-Deposit, directs to Adjust any Recovered Amount to Deposit [Read Order]
X

The Madras High Court has refused to remand a GST ( Goods and Services Tax ) assessment that had already been passed through a detailed, reasoned order, holding that there is no scope for reconsideration. Also, directed to make 100% disputed tax as the pre-deposit. A writ petition was filed by APR Logistics against which Justice C. Saravanan upheld the assessment but allowed to...


The Madras High Court has refused to remand a GST ( Goods and Services Tax ) assessment that had already been passed through a detailed, reasoned order, holding that there is no scope for reconsideration. Also, directed to make 100% disputed tax as the pre-deposit.

A writ petition was filed by APR Logistics against which Justice C. Saravanan upheld the assessment but allowed to file an appeal subject to a 100% pre-deposit of the disputed tax, with credit for any amount already recovered.

Know the complete aspects of tax implications of succession, Click here

The petitioner challenged an order dated 31.08.2023 imposing interest of ₹7,688 towards IGST and tax dues of ₹9,33,430 each under CGST and SGST under Section 50 of the TNGST Act. They claimed the order was passed ex parte and requested a fresh opportunity to present the case.

The Court noted that the assessment order was not an ex parte order, but a well-reasoned, detailed order based on the petitioner’s written submissions, and therefore, no remand was required.

The single bench observed that the petitioner was fully aware of the proceedings, failed to seek a personal hearing, and did not file an appeal within the prescribed timeline. Therefore, the Court refused to interfere with the merits.

However, it permitted the petitioner to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority, provided 100% of the disputed tax is deposited within 30 days from receipt of the order. Also, the bench directed to set off any amount already recovered by the department against the required pre-deposit.

Additionally, the high court directed that if the petitioner meets the deposit condition, the appellate authority shall entertain and decide the appeal on merits without raising objections on limitation. If there is any failure to fulfil these obligations, then it will automatically result in dismissal of the writ petition, which grants liberty to the GST department for the recovery.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates

APR Logistics vs The State Tax Officer , 2025 TAXSCAN (HC) 2456 , W.P.No.43767 of 2025 and W.M.P.Nos.48875 and 48876 of 2025 , 18 November 2025 , M/s.Divya A , Mrs.P.Selvi
APR Logistics vs The State Tax Officer
CITATION :  2025 TAXSCAN (HC) 2456Case Number :  W.P.No.43767 of 2025 and W.M.P.Nos.48875 and 48876 of 2025Date of Judgement :  18 November 2025Coram :  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANANCounsel of Appellant :  M/s.Divya ACounsel Of Respondent :  Mrs.P.Selvi
Next Story

Related Stories

All Rights Reserved. Copyright @2019