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) 49301

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, J
Duraipandian Arumugaraja – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner (ST) – Respondent
WP No. 20857 of 2026 | W.M.P. Nos.22499 and 22500 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: G.Derrick Sam
For the Respondents: R.Sethu Prabakaran

The Court may set aside an assessment order and remand the matter for fresh consideration where the petitioner agrees to settle a portion of the tax liability as a condition, thereby curing the initial lack of reasonable opportunity.

Headnote:The petitioner filed a writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India challenging an assessment order issued under the Goods and Services Tax regime, alleging a violation of the principles of natural justice due to the lack of opportunity to submit supporting documents. The Court observed the lapse of the statutory appeal period and the petitioner's willingness to satisfy a portion of the tax demand as a precondition for re-adjudication. The issue before the Court was whether the impugned assessment order should be set aside and remanded for a fresh hearing given the circumstances of the case and the petitioner's concession. The Court reasoned that remanding the matter, subject to a 25% deposit of the disputed tax, balances the interests of justice and revenue recovery while ensuring procedural fairness. The writ petition is disposed of on the above terms.

Table of Content
1. remand of assessment order based on consensus and tax deposit. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of writ of certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order issued vide FORM DRC-07 in Ref. No. ZD331125212265X dated 12.11.2025 for the assessment year 2021-2022, by the respondent and quash the same.

ORDER

An assessment order dated 12.11.2025 is assailed primarily on the ground that the petitioner was not provided reasonable opportunity to submit supporting documents.

2. Mr.R.Sethu Prabakaran, learned Government Counsel (Tax), accepts notice for the respondent.

3. The period of limitation for filing an appeal has expired. On instructions, learned counsel for the petitioner agrees to remit 25% of the disputed tax demand under the impugned order as a condition for remand. An endorsement to that effect is made on the bundle.

4. Subject to the remittance of 25% of the disputed tax demand, as agreed to, within thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded for re-consideration. After providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, fresh order shall be issued within three months from the date of remittance of 25% of the disputed tax demand. In view of the impugned order being set aside, the attachment, if any, of the bank account of the petitioner shall stand raised.

5. The writ petition is disposed of on the above terms. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

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