Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C. Saravanan, J
The Commissioner, Namakkal Municipality – Appellant
Versus
The Deputy Commissioner (Commercial Tax), Appellate Authority – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. representation of respondents acknowledged. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. proposal of filing time and conditions for appeal. (Para 4) |
| 3. deposited amounts and their implications. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. comparison with similar past decisions. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. conditions for fresh orders on merits. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 6. consequences of non-compliance. (Para 12 , 13) |
ORDER
Mrs.K.Vasanthamala, learned Government Advocate takes notice for the Respondents.
2. This Writ Petition is being disposed of at the stage of admission itself with the consent of the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Government Advocate for the Respondents.
3. The Petitioner is before this Court against the impugned order dated
15.04.2025 passed by the 2nd Respondent and order dated 24.12.2025, whereby the 1st Respondent has rejected the appeal against the order passed by the 1st Respondent.
4. The appeal was filed before the 1st Respondent on 09.10.2025 beyond the condonable period of limitation. However, it is noticed that at the time of filing of an appeal, the Petitioner has pre-deposited 10% of the disputed tax.
5. It is also noticed that the Petitioner has failed to respond to the Notice in Form GST DRC – 01
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
