Case Summary: M/s. Jayam and Co. v. Deputy State Tax Officer-I
Gandhi Market Assessment Circle, Trichy Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
W.P.(MD) No. 10066 of 2025
Judgment dated 09.04.2025
Category: Assessment Order – Natural Justice – Overlapping Demands – Triple Taxation
Relevant Provisions:
-
Section 73 & 74, CGST/TNGST Acts, 2017
-
Rule 142, CGST Rules, 2017
Facts of the Case (Paras 2–3)
The petitioner, M/s Jayam and Co., challenged an assessment order dated 25.02.2025 issued by the Deputy State Tax Officer, Trichy, for FY 2020–21. The petitioner contended that this was the third demand raised for the same period—one already assessed by the Central GST authorities and another by the State GST officers.
A detailed investigation by the Central GST authorities had earlier resulted in a confirmed demand of ₹71,97,634 for 2017–18 to 2020–21. An appeal against that order was pending before the Joint Commissioner (Appeals). Despite this, the State GST officer issued another demand order through the GSTN portal without providing a proper opportunity of hearing. The petitioner alleged triple taxation and lack of procedural fairness.
Question for Determination
Whether the impugned State GST assessment order for FY 2020–21 was sustainable when:
-
A parallel demand already existed under Central GST for the same period; and
-
The order was passed ex parte through the GSTN portal without effective service of notice.
Observations of the Court (Paras 4–8)
The State contended that the impugned order was independent, arising from discrepancies between GSTR-9 and GSTR-3B, and did not overlap with the Central demand. It was argued that notices were duly issued on the GST portal, and the taxpayer bore responsibility to check and respond.
However, the Court noted that:
-
The impugned order lacked clarity on whether the demands overlapped with prior assessments;
-
The triple taxation contention required factual examination; and
-
Service solely through the GST portal, without ensuring the petitioner’s awareness, deprived them of a reasonable opportunity to reply.
Hence, there was a clear violation of principles of natural justice.
Judgment (Paras 9–10)
The Madurai Bench set aside the assessment order dated 25.02.2025 and remitted the matter to the Deputy State Tax Officer for fresh adjudication. The authority was directed to:
-
Examine issues of overlapping demand and alleged triple taxation;
-
Ensure proper service and grant of opportunity to the petitioner; and
-
Pass a speaking order within four months.
No order as to costs was made, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.
Table: Summary of Key Judgments Referred
| Case / Citation | Court | Issue | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| M/s Jayam and Co. v. Deputy State Tax Officer-I | Madras HC (Madurai Bench) | Overlapping GST demand, portal-only communication | Assessment set aside for violation of natural justice; matter remanded |
Between Fine Lines
This decision reinforces that merely uploading notices on the GST portal does not amount to valid service, especially when taxpayers are unaware of such communication. Authorities must ensure real opportunity of hearing and avoid duplicative or overlapping assessments under State and Central GST jurisdictions for the same taxable period.
Disclaimer – “The above summary is for academic purpose only; not formal legal opinion. Seek professional opinion before application. Author or publisher or website shall not be responsible for any usage in any form.”
