[Cites 22, Cited by 0]
Madras High Court
Macmet Engineering Limited vs The State Tax Officer-Iii on 19 February, 2026
Author: C.Saravanan
Bench: C.Saravanan
W.P.No.19710 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 19.02.2026
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN
W.P.No.19710 of 2025
Macmet Engineering Limited,
Represented by its Authorised Signatory
Ajit Kumar Poddar … Petitioner
Vs.
The State Tax Officer-III,
(Intelligence), Adjudication Cell,
Vellore,
Station: Villupuram Commercial
Taxes Building … Respondent
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for
issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the Respondent herein to issue
FORM GST DRC-07 in Order in O.R.No.952/2022-23 dated 16.07.2022.
For Petitioner : Mr.T.Suresh
For Respondent : Mr.V.Prashanth Kiran
Government Advocate
ORDER
This Writ Petition was dismissed in open Court for a detailed order to
be passed in the Chambers.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/03/2026 11:54:06 am )
2. However, while finalizing the order, it was noticed that the Hon’ble
Supreme Court has rendered its decision on 24.07.2025 under a somewhat
similar circumstances in ASP Traders Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and
others, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1507. The content of which has been referred
to in an earlier Order dated 04.02.2026 in W.P.No.30727 of 2025. Hence,
this case was listed today i.e., on 02.03.2026 under the caption for
clarification for passing a fresh order in the light of the above decision of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in ASP Traders Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and
others, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1507.
3. This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the
Respondent to issue Form GST DRC-07 for the Order in O.R.No.952/2022-
23 dated 16.07.2022 to enable the Petitioner to file an appeal before the
Appellate Authority.
4. The facts on record reveal that the Petitioner, a Consignor from
West Bengal, was transporting goods to a Consignee in Tuticorin via a
Conveyance bearing Registration No.NL01K1564. The consignment was
accompanied by an e-way bill generated at the time of dispatch from West
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/03/2026 11:54:06 am )
Bengal, which was valid up to 11.07.2022 for delivery of the goods to the
Consignee at Tuticorin.
5. The vehicle was intercepted by Thiru.R.Ramesh (State Tax Officer),
Roving Squad, Cuddalore, on 12.07.2022 at 03.00 p.m. at T.Mavidanthal.
Since the e-way bill had already expired, a statement was recorded from the
driver on 12.07.2022 under Section 68(3) of the respective GST Enactments.
Thus, a Show Cause Notice was issued on 12.07.2022, which culminated in
the Order in Form GST MOV-06.
6. Since the consignment was required immediately, the Petitioner
made arrangements for payment, paid the penalty, and released the goods on
15.07.2022. A detailed order was thereafter passed on 16.07.2022 whereby, a
penalty of Rs.2,60,718/- was imposed on the driver / tax payer under Section
129(1) of the respective GST Enactments.
7. The case of the Petitioner is that after the impugned Order was
passed, the Petitioner approached the State Tax Officer on 13.10.2022 at
Kolkatta for issuance of the Summary of the Order in Form GST DRC-07 to
enable the Petitioner to file an appeal. A representation was also prepared on
13.10.2022, which was received by the State Tax Officer on 14.10.2022.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/03/2026 11:54:06 am )
8. It is submitted that since the copy of the Order in Form GST
DRC-07 was not received, the Petitioner could not file an appeal and
therefore, the Petitioner has approached this Court.
9. Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned
Government Advocate of the Respondent.
10. A perusal of the records shows that there is an enormous delay in
approaching this Court for the aforesaid relief. If the Petitioner wanted the
summary of the Order in Form GST DRC-07 to file an appeal against the
impugned Order before the Appellate Authority under Section 107 of the
respective GST Enactments, the Petitioner should have approached this Court
earlier. Further, once the amount has been proved, the Petitioner is precluded
from challenging the penalty imposed in terms of Section 129(5) of the
respective GST Enactments.
11. That apart, even if there was a breakdown of the vehicle at
Cuddalore, steps should have been taken to revalidate the e-way bill in terms
of Rule 138(10) of the respective GST Rules then and there or within a
reasonable period of time.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/03/2026 11:54:06 am )
12. As per third Proviso to Rule 138(10), the validity of an e-way bill
can be extended by 8 hours before or after the time of its expiry. There are
indication that no steps were taken to revalidate the e-way bill. The statement
of the driver that was recorded is also silent as to the alleged repair /
malfunction of the Conveyance bearing Registration No.NL01K1564.
13. The Petitioner ought to have approached this Court at an earlier
point of time by explaining the position and filing a statement from the driver
that there was a breakdown of the vehicle and therefore, the vehicle was
intercepted by the Authorities before the goods were delivered at the place of
the destination in Tuticorin.
14. The Order passed in JVS Agencies, Represented by its
Proprietor Vs. Superintendent Range-III, Chennai in W.P.No.30727 of
2025 on 04.02.2026 has taken note of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in ASP Traders case (referred to supra). From Paragraph Nos.6 to 16
in W.P.No.30727 of 2025, it has been observed as under:-
“6. As per Rules 142(5) of the CGST Rules, 2017,
a summary of the orders issued under sections 52, 62,
63, 64, 73, 74, 74A, 75, 76, 122, 123, 124, 125, 127, 129
and 130 shall be uploaded electronically in FORM GST
DRC-07, specifying therein the amount of tax, interest
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/03/2026 11:54:06 am )
and penalty, as the case may be, payable by the person
concerned. These Rules are reproduced below:
(5) A summary of the order issued
under section 52 or section 62 or section
63 or section 64 or section 73 or section
74 10[or section 74A] or section
75 or section 76 or section 122 or section
123 or section 124 or section
125 or section 127 or section
129 or section 130 shall be uploaded
electronically in FORM GST DRC-07,
specifying therein the amount of 6[tax,
interest and penalty, as the case may be,
payable by the person concerned].
7. As per Rule 142(6) of the CGST Rules, 2017,
such electronic uploading of orders in Form GST
DRC-07 shall be treated as the Notice for recovery.
8. Thus, the purpose of uploading Form GST
DRC-07 electronically is solely to provide a summary of
the demand, which is to be treated as a Notice for
Recovery of the tax confirmed in the Assessment Order.
The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs has,
however, clarified otherwise in its Instruction No.
04/2023-GST dated 23.11.2023 as under:-
“2. It is also mentioned that as per sub-
rule (5) of rule 142 of CGST Rules, where
any order is issued by the proper officer
under section 52 or section 62 or section 63
or section 64 or section 73 or section 74 or
section 75 or section 76 or section 122 or
section 123 or section 124 or section 125 or
section 127 or section 129 or section 130 of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/03/2026 11:54:06 am )
CGST Act, summary of such order is also
required to be uploaded electronically on the
portal by the proper officer in FORM GST
DRC-07, specifying the amount of tax,
interest and penalty, as the case may be,
payable by the person concerned.
…..
4. It is highlighted that non-issuance of the
summary of such notices/ orders
electronically on the portal is in clear
violation of the explicit provisions of CGST
Rules. Besides, serving/ uploading the
summary of notices/ orders electronically on
the portal not only makes the said notices/
orders available electronically to the
taxpayers on the portal, but also helps in
keeping a track of such proceedings and
consequential action in respect of recovery,
appeal etc, subsequent to issuance of such
notices/ orders. Accordingly, any deviation
from this requirement under CGST Rules
may adversely impact record keeping under
GST. Further, such an action may also
impact further proceedings of appeal and/ or
recovery to be done seamlessly on the portal.
5. The proper officers are accordingly
directed to ensure that summary of the
notices issued under section 52 or section 73
or section 74 or section 122 or section 123
or section 124 or section 125 or section 127
or section 129 or section 130 of CGST Act
are served, electronically on the portal in
FORM GST DRC-01. Also, they should
ensure that summary of the order issued
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/03/2026 11:54:06 am )
under section 52 or section 62 or section 63
or section 64 or section 73 or section 74 or
section 75 or section 76 or section 122 or
section 123 or section 124 or section 125 or
section 127 or section 129 or section 130 of
CGST Act is uploaded electronically on the
portal in FORM GST DRC-07.”
9. The Hon’ble Supreme Court while dealing with
a similar issue as in the present case in the context of an
order passed under Section 129(3) of the respective GST
Enactment in ASP TRADERS vs. STATE OF UTTAR
PRADESH [(2025) 32 Centax 446], held that
compliance with these procedural requirements is
essential not only for ensuring transparency and
accountability in tax administration, but also for
safeguarding the taxpayer’s appellate rights under the
CGST Act, 2017. There, the arguments of the assessee,
which were captured in Paragraph 4.7 and are similar
to the arguments in the present writ petition, were
entertained. The said paragraph of the aforesaid
judgment is reproduced below:-
“4.7. In light of the above
submissions, the learned counsel prayed
that the impugned order of the High Court
be set aside, and appropriate directions be
issued to the respondent authorities to pass
final orders in Form GST MOV-09 and GST
DRC-07, thereby preserving the appellant’s
right to appeal against the same under the
CGST Act, 2017.”
10. The Hon’ble Supreme Court had also referred
to Circular No.41/15/2018-GST, dated 13.04.2018. The
text of the said circular was also reproduced and
clarified by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Paragraph 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/03/2026 11:54:06 am )
of the judgment, which is as under:-
“(n) An order of confiscation of goods shall
be passed in FORM GST MOV-11, after
taking into consideration the objections filed
by the person in charge of the goods (owner
or his representative), and the same shall be
served on the person concerned. Once the
order of confiscation is passed, the title of
such goods shall stand transferred to the
Central Government. In the said order, a
suitable time not exceeding three months shall
be offered to make the payment of tax, penalty
and fine imposed in lieu of confiscation and
get the goods released. The order in FORM
GST MOV-11 shall be uploaded on the
common portal and the demand accruing
from the order shall be added in the
electronic liability register and, upon
payment of the demand, such register shall be
credited by either debiting the electronic cash
ledger or the electronic credit ledger of the
concerned person in accordance with the
provisions of section 49 of the CGST Act.
Once an order of confiscation of goods is
passed in FORM GST MOV-11, the order in
FORM GST MOV-09 passed earlier with
respect to the said goods shall be
withdrawn.”
11. The Hon’ble Supreme Court took note of the
aforesaid circular and ultimately concluded as under:-
“19. Therefore, even assuming that
the payment was made by the appellant,
voluntarily or otherwise, the proper officer
could not be absolved of the statutory
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/03/2026 11:54:06 am )
obligation to pass a reasoned order in Form
GST MOV-09 and upload the corresponding
summary in Form GST DRC-07.
Compliance with these procedural
requirements is essential not only for
ensuring transparency and accountability in
tax administration, but also for
safeguarding the taxpayer’s appellate rights
under the CGST Act, 2017. Such adherence
is in consonance with the constitutional
mandate under Article 265 of the
Constitution of India.
20. In view of the foregoing
discussion, and taking into account that
objections were filed, payment was stated
to have been made under protest due to
business exigencies, and the appellant
seeks to challenge the levy, the proper
officer was under a clear statutory
obligation to pass a final order under
section 129(3) in Form GST MOV-09 and
DRC-07. The refusal by the High Court to
direct the passing of such an order, has the
effect of frustrating the appellant’s
statutory right to appeal and is contrary to
well established legal principles governing
tax adjudication and procedural fairness.
21. Accordingly, the impugned order
passed by the High Court is set aside.
Respondent No.3 is directed to pass a
reasoned final order under section 129(3)
of the CGST Act, 2017, in Form GST
MOV-09, after granting an opportunity of
being heard as mandated under section
129(4), and upload the summary thereof in
Form GST DRC-07 within a period of one
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/03/2026 11:54:06 am )
month from the date of receipt of a copy of
this judgment. Thereafter, it shall be open
to the appellant to pursue appropriate legal
remedies against such order, in accordance
with law.”
12. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid
judgment has indicated that uploading of the summary of
the order in Form GST DRC-07 to the web portal, as per
Rule 142(5) of the respective GST Rules, is mandatory
for filing a statutory appeal against the assessment
order.
13. Considering the same, all recovery
proceedings pursuant to the speaking order (Order-in-
Original No. 01/2024-25 (GST)) dated 09.04.2024) is
directed to be kept in abeyance till the uploading of the
summary of the order in Form GST DRC-07 in the web
portal.
14. In case, such summary order is uploaded to
the web portal, the respondent is at liberty to proceed
against the petitioner in accordance with law.
15. The petitioner is also at liberty to challenge
the said order before the Appellate Authority in the
manner known to law.
16. This Writ Petition stands disposed of with the
above observations. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/03/2026 11:54:06 am )
15. In the light of the above, this Writ Petition is disposed of by
directing the Respondent to issue Form GST DRC-07 to the Petitioner to file
an appeal before the Appellate Authority. No costs.
19.02.2026
Neutral Citation : Yes / No
raja / arb
To:
The State Tax Officer-III,
(Intelligence), Adjudication Cell,
Vellore,
Station: Villupuram Commercial
Taxes Building.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/03/2026 11:54:06 am )
C.SARAVANAN, J.
raja / arb
19.02.2026
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 03/03/2026 11:54:06 am )
