Amrutlal Arjan Pokar v. Assistant Commissioner of GST and Central Excise
WP/29232/2026 · 2026-08-07
Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy
Transfer Petitionbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 61425 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 61425 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
WP No. 29232 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 07-08-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY WP No. 29232 of 2026 and W.M.P.Nos.32120 & 32121 of 2026 Amrutlal Arjan Pokar Sole Proprietor of Narayani Construction 126/7A, CMRD Road, Keelkattalai, Kancheepuram, Tamil Nadu- 600 117 ..Petitioner(s) Vs
1. Assistant Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, Pallavaram Division, Chennai. 2. The Branch Manager Federal Bank, C48, TNHB Complex, 2nd Avenue, Anna Nagar, Chennai ..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 leading to the issuance of assessment order bearing reference No.ZD3312254607487 dated 31.12.2025 and order-in-original-162/ 2025-GST (DC-AC) dated 10.12.2025 by the first Respondent herein and quash the same, and direct the First Respondent to lift the bank attachment made to the Petitioners bank account number 13240200030358 lying with the Second Respondent. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP No. 29232 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 4 For Petitioner(s): Ms.B.Chandrika for Mr.Sri Harini S P For Respondent(s): Mr.Su.Srinivasan, Sr. SC Mr.J.Harikrishna, Jr. SC ********** ORDER An order dated 31.12.2025 is assailed on the ground that the petitioner did not have a reasonable opportunity to contest the tax demand on merits. 2. Mr.Su,Srinivasan, learned senior standing counsel and Mr.J.Harikrishna, learned junior standing counsel, accept notice on behalf of the respondents. 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. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP No. 29232 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 4
5. Subject to the condition that the petitioner remits 25% of the disputed tax demand within sixty 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. 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. 07-08-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No RNA To
1. Assistant Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, Pallavaram Division, Chennai. 2. The Branch Manager Federal Bank, C48, TNHB Complex, 2nd Avenue Anna Nagar, Chennai https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP No. 29232 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 4 SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J. RNA WP No. 29232 of 2026 and W.M.P.Nos.32120 & 32121 of 2026 07-08-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis