Madras HC Grants Conditional Relief in GST Recovery Case Involving Ex Parte Adjudication:

Madras HC Grants Conditional Relief in GST Recovery Case Involving Ex Parte Adjudication

Court balances revenue interest and natural justice by directing partial pre-deposit before reopening adjudication

Madras HC Orders Rs. 25 Lakh Deposit in GST Recovery Case Over Ex Parte Adjudication

authorMeetu KumaridateFeb 11, 2026
Last update on Feb 11, 2026
Madras HC Grants Conditional Relief in GST Recovery Case Involving Ex Parte Adjudication The writ petition was filed by M/s. Era Cell Private Limited challenging an Order-in-Original dated 30.07.2025, passed by the Assistant Commissioner of GST and the consequential recovery notice dated 01.12.2025. The impugned order arose from Show Cause Notice No.42/2024 (GST-DC), under which substantial tax, interest, and penalty were confirmed under Section 74 of the CGST/TNGST Act, 2017.
Sales Tax Bar Urges FM to Reduce High GSTAT Appeal Fees; Highlights Burden on MSMEs and Small Traders
The petitioner contended that its GST registration had been cancelled as early as 14.07.2023 and that the show cause notice dated 15.07.2025 was never served upon it. The adjudication proceeded ex parte, culminating in a demand of over Rs. 1.49 crore along with equal penalty and interest. Issue Before HC: Whether the impugned Order-in-Original and recovery proceedings could be sustained when the petitioner alleged non-receipt of the show cause notice and denial of an effective opportunity of hearing. HC Decided: The Hon'ble High Court declined to conclusively adjudicate the issue of service of notice in a summary writ proceeding. The Court took note of the fact that the petitioner’s Director had closed the business and was presently abroad, leaving the company to be represented by his mother, a senior citizen homemaker.
Sales Tax Bar Urges FM to Reduce High GSTAT Appeal Fees; Highlights Burden on MSMEs and Small Traders
The Court directed the petitioner, represented through its Director and her son, to deposit Rs. 25 lakh towards the disputed tax within 30 days. It was further held that failure to comply would entitle the department to proceed with recovery as if the writ petition had been dismissed in limine. The writ petition was disposed of, with no order as to costs. To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below

About Author

Meetu Kumari

Content Manager

Meetu Kumari is an Experienced Advocate and Content Writer with 4+ years of demonstrated history of working in the law practice industry. Skilled in Developing Content, Researching, and Drafting. Strong professional with a Bachelor of Science (B.Sc.) focused on Law from Gujarat National Law University.
Studycafe
Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India
2161
Up Next

Loading suggestions…