Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, M/s.MSK Worldwide Express Private Limited, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging an order-in-original dated 11.11.2025 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, Guindy Division, Chennai South Commissionerate, primarily on the ground of breach of principles of natural justice. The petitioner had discontinued business and its GST registration was cancelled in June 2019. The petitioner argued that it had no cause to access the GST portal six years later, and the respondent had recorded that the petitioner was not carrying on business at the address specified in GST records. The respondent contended that the petitioner should have informed the GST authorities of the change in address and that the impugned order should not be interfered with because the petitioner had generated two e-way bills in respect of each invoice. The court observed that although a person whose registration was later cancelled has access to the GST portal, it cannot be reasonably expected that such person would access the portal six years after discontinuing business and after cancellation of registration. The court held that the matter warrants reconsideration because the impugned order was issued without hearing the petitioner. The petitioner's counsel consented to pay 10% of the disputed tax demand as a condition for remand. Subject to that condition being fulfilled within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, the court set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter for reconsideration. The respondent was directed to provide a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, including an opportunity to respond to the show cause notice within 15 days, and to issue a fresh order within three months from the date of receipt of the petitioner's reply. The bank attachment was directed to stand raised upon fulfillment of the condition. The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) GST - Principles of Natural Justice - Show Cause Notice - Section 75(4) of CGST Act, 2017 - The impugned order was passed without hearing the petitioner, who had discontinued business and whose GST registration was cancelled in June 2019. The court held that it cannot be reasonably expected that such person would access the GST portal six years later, and thus the order warrants reconsideration. (Paras 1-4) B) GST - Pre-deposit Condition - Remand - Section 75(4) of CGST Act, 2017 - The petitioner consented to pay 10% of the disputed tax demand as a condition for remand. The court set aside the order and remanded for reconsideration, subject to fulfillment of the condition within two weeks, and directed that the bank attachment shall stand raised upon such fulfillment. (Paras 5-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the impugned order-in-original under GST was passed in violation of principles of natural justice when the petitioner had discontinued business and registration was cancelled, and whether the order should be set aside and remanded.
Final Decision
The impugned order dated 11.11.2025 is set aside and the matter is remanded for reconsideration, subject to the condition that the petitioner pays 10% of the disputed tax demand within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The respondent shall provide a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, including an opportunity to respond to the show cause notice within 15 days, and issue a fresh order within three months from the date of receipt of the petitioner's reply. The bank attachment shall stand raised upon fulfillment of the condition. The writ petition is disposed of with no order as to costs.
Law Points
- Principles of natural justice
- reasonable opportunity of hearing
- pre-deposit condition for remand
- bank attachment lifted upon condition fulfillment
