Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 38772 (MAD)

SUNRISE ELECTROPLATERS v. The State Tax Officer (FAC)

WP/22053/2026 · 2026-06-19

Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

WP No. 22053 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 19-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY WP No. 22053 of 2026 and W.M.P. Nos.23940, 23942, 23945 & 23946 of 2026 Sunrise Electroplaters REP BY ITS ACCOUNTANT MS KALAIVANI SURESH A Partnership Concern, Having its place of business at, No.246, 10th Street, SIDCO INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, Pattaravakkam, Chennai-600 098. GSTIN 33ACVFS0251N1ZO ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Tax Officer (FAC) Pattaravakkam Assessment Circle, No.3, /109 Integrated Commercial Taxes Building, Room No.6 Bangalore Highway Road, Varadharajapuram, Poonamallee -600 123. ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the Impugned Order vide Form GST DRC-07 dated 26.12.2025, passed by the Respondent in Reference No. ZD331225403030B, for the FY-2021-22, and the consequential recovery proceedings vide Form GST DRC-13 dated 18.05.2026 initiated pursuant thereto, in respect of the Petitioner bearing GSTIN33ACVFS0251N1ZO and quash the same, and consequently remand the matter back to the Respondent for fresh adjudication after affording the Petitioner a reasonable opportunity to file objections, produce supporting documents and reconciliation statements and be heard in person. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 22053 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 4 For Petitioner(s): Mr.V.Narendran for Mr.B. Prashanth Nadaraj For Respondent(s): O R D E R An order dated 26.12.2025 is assailed in this writ petition on the ground of alleged breach of principles of natural justice. 2. Ms.Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran, learned Government Counsel (Tax), accepts notice on behalf of the respondent. 3. The period of limitation for filing an appeal has expired. On instructions, learned counsel for the petitioner agrees to pay 25% of the disputed tax demand as a condition for remand. An endorsement to that effect is made on the bundle. 4. Subject to the condition that the petitioner remits 25% of the disputed tax demand, as agreed to, within thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded for re-consideration. After providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, a fresh order shall be issued within three months from the date of remittance of 25% of the disputed tax demand. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 22053 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 4 5. The writ petition is disposed of on the above terms. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs. 19-06-2026 Index: No Speaking order Neutral Citation: No GSA To The State Tax Officer (FAC) Pattaravakkam Assessment Circle, No.3, /109 Integrated Commercial taxes Building, Room No.06 Bangalore Highway Road, Varadharajapuram, Poonamallee -600 123. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 22053 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 4 SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J. GSA WP No. 22053 of 2026 and W.M.P. Nos.23940, 23942, 23945 & 23946 of 2026 19-06-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis