SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 12156

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
D. KABILAN – Appellant
Versus
Thoothukudi Corporation – Respondent



##PAGE1##

W.P.(MD)No.2936 of 2026

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED :04.02.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

W.P.(MD)No.2936 of 2026

and WMP(MD) Nos.2419 to 2421 of 2026

D.Kabilan ... Petitioner

Vs

1. Thoothukudi Corporation,

Represented by its Commissioner, Thoothukudi..

2. The Taxation Appeals Commitee,

Thoothukudi Corporation, Thoothukudi.

3. The Assistant Commissioner,

West Zone, Thoothukudi Corporation,

Thoothukudi. ... Respondents

PRAYER :- Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to

call for the records relating to the impugned demand notice dated

11.01.2025 issued by the 3rd respondent in respect of the petitioner's

property situated at Door No.180, Palai Road, Thoothukudi District,

bearing Old Assessment No.138/430665 and New Assessment No.

138/030/901819, and the impugned order in Na.Ka.No.A1/1089/2025

dated 27.03.2025 passed by the 1st respondent and quash the same and

consequently direct the respondents to refund the excess amount of

Rs.1,24,038/- collected towards property tax for the year 2024-25 under

payment receipt bearing No.2069396 dated 30.01.2025.

1/5

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/02/2026 03:55:10 pm )

##PAGE2##

W.P.(MD)No.2936 of 2026

For Petitioner :Mr.M.P.Senthil

For Respondents :Mr.N.Anandkumar

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned demand

notice dated 11.01.2025 issued by the 3rd respondent in respect of the

petitioner's property situated at Door No.180, Palai Road, Thoothukudi

District, bearing Old Assessment No.138/430665 and New Assessment

No.138/030/901819, and the impugned order in Na.Ka.No.A1/1089/2025

dated 27.03.2025 passed by the 1st respondent and to direct the

respondents to refund the excess amount of Rs.1,24,038/- collected

towards property tax for the year 2024-25 under payment receipt bearing

No.2069396 dated 30.01.2025.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

counsel appearing for the respondents. By consent of both sides, the writ

petition itself is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission

itself.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that without

making any assessment order, providing opportunities to the petitioner to

2/5

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/02/2026 03:55:10 pm )

##PAGE3##

W.P.(MD)No.2936 of 2026

file a reply and participated in the personal hearing, the order of original

assessment order was passed. Therefore, the petitioner has challenged

the same before the Taxation Appellate Committee, which confirmed the

demand notice by virtue of the impugned order and again consequential

impugned orders came to be issued.

4. The learned counsel for the respondent would however submit

that initially the petitioner challenged the order impugned before the

Taxation Committee, which confirmed the order. However, he fairly

submit that since no assessment order was passed, the matter may be

remanded back to the respondents for reconsideration.

5. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the

materials available on record.

6. Considering the submission made on either side, admittedly, no

opportunity was provided before issuing demand notice or prior to the

original demand, which is challenged before the Taxation Appellate

committee and ultimately culminated in the form of impugned order

dated 27.03.2025. The impugned notice was passed, without calling for

any reply and without providing any opportunity and without hearing the

3/5

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 12/02/2026 03:55:10 pm )

##PAGE4##

W.P.(MD)No.2936 of 2026

petitioner. On the sole ground, the impugned notices are liable to be set

aside. Accordingly, the impugned notices/orders are set aside and the

matter is remanded back to the respondents for fresh consideration. The

respondents are directed to issue fresh notice for assessment order and

thereafter after receiving the reply from the petitioner and affording an

opportunity of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top