M/S.Sri Leela Dairy v. The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC)
WP/23309/2026 · 2026-06-30
Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy
Transfer Petitionbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 42580 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 42580 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
W.P.No.23309 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 30-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY W.P.No.23309 of 2026 and W.M.P.Nos.25277 & 25278 of 2026 M/S.Sri Leela Dairy Represented by its proprietor Radha, SF 841/2, Kutty Goundenpathy, Kumitpathi, Thirumalayampalayam, Coimbatore 641105 ..Petitioner(s) Vs The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC) Office of the Commercial Tax Officer, Perur Assessment Circle, Coimbatore. ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of the respondent in the impugned order in GSTIN33BKXPR9981D1ZA /2021 -2022 dated 22.12.2025 along with consequential order in form DRC-07 bearing a Ref No.ZD331225337221X dated 22.12.2025 for the period 2021- 2022 and quash the same as it is being contrary to the provision of CGST Act, 2017. For Petitioner(s): Mr.S.Kannan For Respondent(s): Ms.Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran Government Counsel (Tax) https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23309 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 4 ORDER An order dated 21.12.2025 is assailed on the ground that the petitioner was not provided reasonable opportunity to provide supporting documents before confirming the tax proposals. 2.Ms.Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran, learned Government Counsel (Tax), accepts notice on behalf of the respondent. 3.On perusal of the impugned order, it is evident that the tax proposal was affirmed on the ground that the petitioner had not replied to the show cause notice or participated in hearings. 4.On instructions, learned counsel for the petitioner agrees to pay 50% of the disputed tax demand as a condition for remand. An endorsement to that effect is made on the bundle. 5.Subject to the condition that the petitioner remits 50% 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 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23309 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 4 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 50% of the disputed tax demand. 6.The writ petition is disposed of on the above terms. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs. 30-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No hvk To The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (FAC), Office of the Commercial Tax Officer, Perur Assessment Circle, Coimbatore.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23309 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 4 SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J. hvk W.P.No.23309 of 2026 30-06-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis