Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 53883 (MAD)

SHRI VENKATESWARA INDUSTRIES v. THE DEPUTY STATE TAX OFFICER 2

WP/26497/2026 · 2026-07-22

Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

WP No. 26497 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 22-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY WP No. 26497 of 2026 and W.M.P.Nos.28987 & 28988 of 2026 Shri Venkateswara Industries Rep. by its Proprietor ARJUNAN RAGHURAMAN No.5/521, Ambedkar 2nd Cross Street Nanmangalarn, Chennai - 600129 ..Petitioner(s) Vs The Deputy State Tax Officer 2 Medavakkam Assessment circle No.46,Room No.213, II Floor, Mylapore Taluk office Building Greenways Road RA Puram chennai-600 028 ..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 passed by the Respondent in Form GST DRC-07 bearing Reference No. ZD331225278093I /2021-2022, dated 17.12.2025 under Section 73 of the TNGST/CGST Act, 2017, and quash the same, and consequently direct the Respondent to reconsider the matter afresh after providing a fair and reasonable opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner and permitting the Petitioner to submit all supporting documents. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 26497 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 4 For Petitioner(s): Ms.Monisha For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Sethu Prabakaran, Government Counsel (Tax) ************ ORDER An order dated 17.12.2025 is assailed on the ground that the petitioner did not have a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits. 2. Mr.R.Sethu Prabakaran, 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. On instructions, learned counsel for the petitioner agrees to remit 25% of the disputed tax demand as a condition for remand. An endorsement to that effect has been made on the bundle. 5. Subject to the condition that the petitioner remits 25% of the disputed tax demand within thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 26497 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 4 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. 6. The writ petition is disposed of on the above terms. Consequently, connected writ miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs. 22-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No RNA To The Deputy State Tax Officer 2 Medavakkam Assessment circle No.46,Room No.213, II Floor, Mylapore Taluk office Building Greenways Road RA Puram chennai-600 028 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 26497 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 4 SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J. RNA WP No. 26497 of 2026 and W.M.P.Nos.28987 & 28988 of 2026 22-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis