Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Krishnan Ramasamy, J
Tvl. A.S.R.Traders, Represented by its Proprietor, T.Srinivasan – Appellant
Versus
The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Tuticorin-III Assessment Circle, Tuticorin – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner challenges tax orders. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. petitioner agrees to pay tax. (Para 5) |
| 3. insufficient notice provided. (Para 6 , 7 , 9) |
| 4. effective notice is necessary. (Para 8) |
| 5. case remanded for fresh consideration. (Para 10 , 11) |
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 22.08.2025 passed by the first respondent and the consequential order passed by the second respondent dated 10.02.2026.
2. Mr.R.Suresh Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice on behalf of the respondents. By consent of the parties, the main writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in this case, all notices/communications were uploaded by the respondent in the GST common portal. Since the petitioner was not aware of the said notices, they failed to file their reply within the time. Under these circumstances, the impugned order came to be passed by the first respondent without providing any opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and thereafter, consequential order has also been passed by the second respondent. Therefore, this petition has been f
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
