IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 11.11.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN and W .M.P.Nos . 4 8 217 & 4 8 219 o f 2025 Tvl. S.S.Metals, Rep by its Proprietor Mr.A.Syed Shikkandar, 64 A, M.K.N. Road, Guindy, Chennai – 32. ... Petitioner Vs.

The State Tax Officer, Alandur Assessment Circle, I.C.T & R.D Buildings, [South Tower], IIIRD Floor, Room No.352, Nandanam, Chennai – 35. ... Respondent Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records on the files of the respondent proceedings in GSTIN : 33CHHPS1611K1ZD/2020-21 dated 26.02.2024 and quash the same as illegal, invalid violated the principles of natural justice and against the law.

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Vijayakumar For Respondent : Ms.Amirtha Poonkodi Dinakaran Government Advocate

ORDER

Ms.Amirtha Poonkodi Dinakaran, learned Government Advocate, takes notice for the respondent.

2. With the consent of the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Advocate for the respondent, this Writ Petition is being disposed of at the time of admission.

3. In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned assessment Order dated 26.02.2024 passed for the tax period 2020-21.

4. The impugned assessment order was preceded a Show Cause Notice dated 15.05.2023. The petitioner had replied to the show cause notice, and pursuant to which, a detailed assessment order came to be passed on 26.02.2024. However, the petitioner filed this writ petition only on

29.09.2025.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that although the order impugned is a detailed order, the petitioner’s reply and their submissions have not been considered, and therefore, the learned counsel prays for quashing the impugned order by way of remand.

6. The Learned Government Advocate for the respondent, on the other hand, would submit that the impugned order is a detailed order, and therefore, does not merit any interference in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTU, Kakinada and others Vs. Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited, [2020 SCC Online SC 440]

7. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate for the respondent, and following the consistent view taken by this Court under similar circumstances, the petitioner is given liberty to file a statutory appeal, subject to the petitioner depositing 50% of the disputed tax in cash from the Petitioner’s Electronic Cash Register, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

8. If the petitioner files such an appeal within such time along with pre-

deposit of 50% of the disputed tax, the Appellate Authority namely Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST), GST Appeals-II, Greams Road, Chennai-600 006, shall dispose of the appeal on merits after hearing the petitioner without reference to limitation.

9. In case the petitioner fails to comply with the above stipulations, the respondent is at liberty to proceed against the petitioner in the manner known to law.

10. With these directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.

11.11.2025 raja Neutral Citation : Yes / No To The State Tax Officer, Alandur Assessment Circle, I.C.T & R.D Buildings, [South Tower], IIIRD Floor, Room No.352, Nandanam, Chennai – 35.

C.SARAVANAN, J.

raja

11.11.2025