IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 11-03-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C. SARAVANAN and WMP Nos.35323 & 35325 of 2025 Mahveer Metal Rep By Its Prop. Dularyadav Lalkeshwar Kumar, No.140, And 141, Na.Arul Murugan Nagar, Vichoor, Village, Manalai New Town, Chennai Tiruvallur, Tamilnadu -600 103 Presently Situated at, Door No.26 Survey No.258/3 Sadayankkuppam Village Road, Manali, Chennai, Tamilnadu-103 ..Petitioner(s)

Vs

1. The Deputy Commissioner(ST)

GST Appeal Chennai-1, Main Building, 2nd Floor, Room No.210, No.1, Greams Road, Chennai-600 006

2. The Commercial Tax Officer The Commercial Tax Officer, Cholavaram Assessment Circle Station Room No.108, 1st Floor, Integrated C.T. Buildings, Chennai-3.

..Respondent(s)

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to Memorandum bearing No.ARN/AD3302250939107/2018-2019/ A2 dated 14.03.2025 passed by the 1^st Respondent and Order in Reference No.ZD330424201279O dated 25.04.2024 passed by the 2^nd Respondent and quash the same and to direct the 1^st Respondent to accept the statutory appeal dated 28.02.2025 filed under Tamil Nadu GST Act, 20l7 against demand order of the 2^nd Respondent in Reference No. ZD330424201279O dated 25.04.2024 without reference to limitation.

For Petitioner(s): Mr. V. Hariharan For Respondent(s): Mr. V. Prashanth Kiran, Govt. Advocate

ORDER

Mr. V. Prashanth Kiran, 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. In this Writ Petition, the Petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 14.03.2025 passed by the 1^st Respondent, whereby the Petitioner’s appeal against the Assessment Order dated 25.04.2024, filed on 28.02.2025, came to be rejected on the ground of limitation.

4. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that pursuant to the impugned proceedings dated 25.04.2025 passed by the 2^nd Respondent, the entire disputed tax amount has been confirmed in the said order has already been recovered from the Petitioner.

5. However, the learned counsel for the Respondents has unable to confirm the above said submission.

6. It is noticed that the limitation for filing an appeal under Section

107 of the respective GST enactments, 2017, against the impugned order has already been expired. The present Writ Petition has been filed only on

18.08.2025.

7. At this stage, the learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is willing to deposit 50% of the disputed tax amount as a condition for denovo adjudication.

8. The learned counsel for the Petitioner has also made the following endorsement to that effect in the Court bundle which has been extracted hereunder:-

“ The Petitioner will deposit 50% of the disputed tax amount.”

9. It is further noticed that the Petitioner had already pre-deposited

10% of the disputed tax at the time of filing of an appeal on 28.02.2025.

10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and taking note of the submission of the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the Petitioner may have a fit case on merits, and filed the appeal in time, this Court is inclined to remit the case back to the 1^st Respondent to pass a fresh order on merits, subject to the Petitioner deposits 40% of the disputed tax, over and above 10% of disputed tax pre-deposited at the time of instituting the appeal on 28.02.2025. The Petitioner may furnish suitable proof/certificate from the jurisdictional Assessing Officer to that effect.

11. In the event of the said deposit of 40% over and above of the 10%

of the disputed tax deposited at the time of filing of the appeal, which has already been recovered from the Petitioner, and the 1^st Respondent shall dispose of the appeal on merits, without further reference to the appeal within the li