Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 55049 (MAD)

Selvam Vinoth Kumar v. Superintendent of GST and CE

WP/26043/2026 · 2026-07-17

Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

WP No. 26043 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 17-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY WP No. 26043 of 2026 and WMP No.28443 of 2026 Selvam Vinoth Kumar Proprietor, M/s. Selva Vinayagar Camphor, No. 106C, Moopanar Nagar, 2nd street, New Jeeva Nagar, Korukkupet, Chennai-600 021 ..Petitioner(s) Vs Superintendent of GST and CE Madhavaram Range-V, Madhavaram Division, Chennai North Commissionerate, First Floor, Newry Towers, Plot No.2054 I Block II Avenue, 12th Main Road, Anna Nagar, Chennai-600 040 ..Respondent(s) Prayer : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the respondent in Order in Original No. 63/2025 (Supdt.-R-V) in Ref No. ZD3312253967361 and quash the order dated 26.12.2025 passed by the respondent herein. For Petitioner(s): M/s.S.Jecintha For Respondent(s): Mr.S.Gurumurthy Senior Standing Counsel Mr.G.Meganathan Junior Standing Counsel https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 26043 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 4 ORDER Order dated 26.12.2025 is assailed only insofar as it pertains to short payment of tax in GSTR 3B. 2.Mr.G.Meganathan, learned Junior Standing Counsel, accepts notice for the respondent. 3.Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the tax proposals in relation to the other four issues were accepted by the petitioner and these tax demands were discharged. As regards short payment of tax in GSTR 3B, it is submitted that the petitioner inadvertently made double entries in the GSTR 1 and that this resulted in the disparity between the GSTR 1 and GSTR 3B returns. Learned counsel submits further that 25% of the tax demand relating to said demand would be remitted as a condition for remand. She has made an endorsement to that effect. 4.The impugned order records that the tax payer was represented by an accountant. Said order also extracts from the written reply of said accountant. From the reply, it appears prima facie that the matter was not dealt with professionally. Therefore, the interest of justice warrants reconsideration with regard to short payment of tax in GSTR 3B. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 26043 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 4 5.Towards that end, the impugned order is partly set aside in relation to defect No.3 subject to remittance of 25% of the tax demand relating thereto within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. After providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, a fresh order shall be issued in respect of defect No.3 within three (3) months from the date of remittance of 25%. 6.The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 17-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No KAS To Superintendent of GST and CE Madhavaram Range-V, Madhavaram Division, Chennai North Commissionerate, First Floor, Newry Towers, Plot No.2054 I Block II Avenue, 12th Main Road, Anna Nagar, Chennai-600 040 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 26043 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 4 SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J. KAS WP No. 26043 of 2026 and WMP No.28443 of 2026 17-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis