Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 47100 (MAD)

Touch Group Designs v. The Deputy State Tax Officer

WP/24569/2026 · 2026-07-09

Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

WP No. 24569 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 09-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY WP No. 24569 of 2026 and W.M.P.No.26795 of 2026 Touch Group Designs Represented by its partner Mr. Palaniyappan 11/5, Annasami Street, Choolaimedu, Chennai. Tamilandu - 600 094 ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The Deputy State Tax Officer MMDA colony Assessment Circle No 88, 2nd Floor, Mayor Ramanathan Salai, Chetpet, Chenani 031 2. The Deputy Commissioner (ST)GST Appeals II C.T. Annexe Building, 3rd Floor No.1, Greams Road, Thousand Lights Chennai, Tamilnadu 600 006 ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, Calling for the records relating to the impugned order in DRC 07 bearing Reference No ZD331225156221W dated 10.12.2025 along with detailed orders dated 10.12.2025 passed by the 1st respondent and quash the same as the same being arbitrary, passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and also in violation of Articles 14, 19 (1) (g) and 265 of the Constitution and subsequently https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 24569 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 4 direct the Respondent to lift the back attachment made vide Recovery Notice dated 16.04.2026. For Petitioner(s): Mr.N. Sri Prithvi Reddy For Respondent(s): Ms.G.Dhana Madhri, Government Counsel (Tax) *********** ORDER An order dated 10.12.2025 is assailed on the ground that the petitioner did not have a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits. 2. Ms.G.Dhana Madhri, learned Government Counsel (Tax), accepts notice on behalf of the respondent. 3. On perusal of the impugned order, it is evident that such order was issued without hearing the petitioner. The writ petition has been filed after the period of limitation expired. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that 10% pre-deposit was made while lodging the appeal. On instructions, he submits further that an additional 15% would be remitted as a condition for remand. An endorsement to that effect has been made on the bundle. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 24569 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 4 5. Subject to the petitioner remitting an additional 15% of the tax demand under the impugned order 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 an additional 15% of the disputed tax demand. 6. The writ petition is disposed of on the above terms. Consequently, connected writ miscellaneous petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. 09-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No RNA To 1. The Deputy State Tax Officer MMDA colony Assessment Circle No 88, 2nd Floor, mayor Ramanathan Salai, Chetpet, Chenani 031 2. The Deputy Commissioner ST GST Appeals II C.T. Annexe Building, 3rd Floor No.1, Greams Road, Thousand Lights Chennai, Tamilnadu 600 006 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 24569 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 4 SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J. RNA WP No. 24569 of 2026 and W.M.P.No.26795 of 2026 09-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis