Conditional writ relief in GST matter: impugned order set aside and remanded for fresh adjudication on deposit and reply compliance.

The Madras HC exercised writ jurisdiction to grant conditional relief against a GST adjudication order where the taxpayer had not replied to the show cause notice or attended hearings and the appeal period had expired. It set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter for fresh adjudication, directing the taxpayer to deposit 50% of the disputed tax in cash within thirty days, file a reply with supporting documents, and treat the impugned order as an addendum to the show cause notice. Amounts already recovered could be adjusted toward the required deposit, subject to verification.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned GST order warranted interference and remand for fresh adjudication, subject to deposit of part of the disputed tax and filing of a reply.

Analysis: The petitioner had not responded to the show cause notice or attended the personal hearings, and the statutory appeal period had also expired. The Court nevertheless exercised writ jurisdiction to balance the interests of both sides, noting that in similar matters relief had been granted on terms. It directed remand of the matter for fresh consideration, requiring the petitioner to deposit 50% of the disputed tax in cash within thirty days, file a reply with supporting documents, and treat the impugned order as an addendum to the show cause notice. Amounts already recovered were permitted to be adjusted towards the required deposit, subject to verification.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside for fresh consideration and the matter was remitted to the respondent, with the petitioner obtaining conditional relief on compliance with the specified deposit and reply requirements.

---